Toronto family out $8,000 after infant daughter’s Air Canada booking goes wrong

A Toronto family returning from a trip to Iran had to spend almost $8,000 in extra tickets and expenses because of a mix-up that prevented their infant daughter from getting a boarding pass.

“The guy told me ‘your ticket has an issue,’” said Amir Chegini, explaining the response at the British Airways ticket counter in Tehran on Oct. 27 last year.


Chegini, his wife Tannaz and nine-month-old daughter Niki were returning from Iran after a vacation when suddenly they faced an intractable problem: British Airways refused to permit their daughter on the aircraft, even though both parents had valid tickets and their daughter’s name appears on the tickets and itinerary.

“They said the Air Canada record doesn’t match the British Airways record,” said Chegini, explaining the first of several conversations at the airport.

Chegini booked his entire trip on the Air Canada website. He paid a total of $9,969 for business class travel which included flights from Toronto to Paris on Air Canada, Frankfurt to Tehran on Lufthansa, and return legs from Tehran to London on British Airways, and a London to Toronto flight on Air Canada.

The outgoing flights were not a problem. But in Tehran, the family faced a serious challenge when it came to their daughter who, because of her age, didn’t require her own seat.

“I can see her name but it doesn’t match our record — we can’t issue a boarding pass for her,” Chegini says he was told over and over. At one point, the agent joked that at least part of the family could go ahead.

“They told me you and your wife don’t have a problem, you can board the plane, but you have to leave your child here,” he said.


Toronto family out $8,000 after infant daughter’s Air Canada booking goes wrong

Over the Limit: Alcohol is a factor in many violent crimes

On March 12, Mark Jante, a 59-year-old Middlesex Township man, called 911 to report that he had stabbed someone and was in need of medical attention.

When police arrived on the scene they found Jante covered in blood, and the victim — a man Jante referred to as his “buddy” — bleeding from his back, according to an affidavit of probable cause filed by the Cumberland County District Attorney’s Office.

The victim died as a result of injuries, and Jante became the first of two people charged with criminal homicide in Cumberland County in 2017.

While killings are rare in the county, there is one factor of the crime Jante is accused of that has become common in the commission of violent crimes: alcohol.

When police spoke to Jante on the scene, they reported he smelled of alcohol. Jante, who has been held in Cumberland County Prison without bail since the attack, told police he had been drinking with the victim all day, according to the affidavit.

Alcohol and violence

“Any situation where there’s a potential for violence, you add alcohol and it’s like adding gasoline to a lit fire,” said David Jernigan, associate professor at Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

Between 2006 and 2010, alcohol was a key factor in more than 300 homicides in Pennsylvania according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Those 300 people account for more than 14,000 years of potential life lost in the state, according to the CDC.

The CDC reports that alcohol played a pivotal role in nearly half of all homicides and nearly a quarter of all suicides in Pennsylvania.

Alcohol is so prevalent in the commission of violent crimes that domestic assaults fell roughly 9 percent after North Dakota instituted a program that aimed to keep repeat DUI defendants abstinent from alcohol.

Jernigan said there are two main factors why alcohol is so prevalent in violence.

One he said is physiological through a disinhibiting effect, meaning a person may make decisions while under the influence of alcohol that they would not otherwise.

“Alcohol basically disables judgment,” he said. “That’s one of the effects it has on the brain.”

A person who may be prone to violence, but is able to control those tendencies when sober, may not be able to when drinking.

Jernigan said the disinhibiting effect is also amplified by a social expectation that alcohol will act this way.

“Expectancies change when people are drinking,” he said.

Jernigan said in studies in which people are given nonalcoholic beverages but are told the drinks contain alcohol, the participants will disinhibit despite being completely sober.

Giving teens alcohol to teach them responsible drinking may backfire

It’s common to hear about parents giving their teens alcohol, hoping that if they learn about responsible drinking at home they’ll be less likely to binge drink when they’re on their own. But a new study suggests that this method doesn’t seem to protect teens from the risks of alcohol abuse.

Australia scientists followed 2,000 teens for six years and found that parents providing alcohol not only doesn’t prevent binge drinking, it was actually linked to teens finding alcohol through other sources. The study, the first to analyze the long-term effect of parents providing alcohol, was published this week in the journal Lancet Public Health.

Every year for six years, teens and their parents filled out different surveys about alcohol habits. The survey asked about alcohol abuse symptoms, binge drinking levels, and how the teens got alcohol. To be clear, “binge” drinking was defined as drinking more than four drinks at once, which the authors acknowledge is a somewhat conservative estimate. And the sources of alcohol included parents, not from parents, and both.

The teenagers in the study were, on average, 13 years old at the beginning and 18 at the end. Unsurprisingly, more parents gave alcohol to their children as the children aged — from 15 percent of parents at the beginning of the study, to about 60 percent at the end.

By the end of the study, 81 percent of teens who received alcohol both from their parents and other sources were binge drinking. In contrast, 62 percent of teens who only got it from other people (and were not given alcohol by their parents) were binge drinking. (Also, 25 percent of teens who were given alcohol only by their parents binged, which is a strange finding.) And teens who got alcohol only from their parents one year were twice as likely to get it from other people the next year.

This is an observational study, so it can’t prove that giving alcohol to your kid causes them to seek it out and binge. There are other limitations too: Self-reported surveys are rarely the most accurate way to measure anything. Teens from low socio-economic status backgrounds weren’t well-represented, and the results are from Australia, and we don’t know how broadly they generalize. Still, it’s an interesting result, and it’s worth thinking about how it’s possible for some well-meaning tactics to backfire.

Americans are less comfortable with LGBTQ people now than they were

A new study released by GLAAD on Thursday found a “significant decline in overall comfort and acceptance of LGBTQ people.” This marks the first time in this particular study’s four-year history that the numbers have declined.

The survey, conducted by Harris Insights and Analytics, is an online poll that measures the American public’s views on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people and issues. Through a series of questions, non-LGBTQ people are asked to rate their comfort level in various situations involving LGBTQ people — from LGBTQ weddings to school curriculum that includes LGBTQ history.

In every single situation, comfort level declined from last year. Three areas where discomfort showed a “significant increase” were “learning a family member is LGBTQ,” “learning my child’s teacher is LGBTQ,” and “learning my doctor is LGBTQ.” The backward step included a reduced number of “allies” (non-LGBTQ respondents who were either “very” or “somewhat” comfortable in all situations) and increased number of “detached supporters” (non-LGBTQ respondents whose comfort level varied).

Study Makes Parents Think Twice About Giving Their Teens Alcohol

While some parents believe that giving their teens alcohol helps them to drink responsibly, a large groundbreaking study says otherwise.

With prom and graduation season just around the corner, parents everywhere are considering which parties to allow their teens to attend. According to the 2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, among underage drinkers, 86% had consumed alcohol in their house or in someone else’s home.

Some parents support the notion of teens drinking in the home, claiming that they can monitor the amount of alcohol consumed. These parents argue that adolescents are going to drink regardless, so they would rather have them drinking at home where they are safe.  For other parents, it’s a matter of teaching their children to drink responsibly before they head off, unmonitored, to college.

Other parents point to Europe, where the drinking age is lower and teens are rumored to be more responsible around alcohol. However, experts say that there is heavier drinking in Europe, so that argument does not hold up.

While parents may feel supportive of teen drinking, many state laws disagree. The majority of states have enacted social host liabilities, holding adults responsible for any injuries that occur when alcohol is consumed on their property.

Related: Does More Advertising Equal More Teen Drinking?

In a new groundbreaking six-year study out of Australia, researchers have found that parents who give their teens alcohol may be doing more harm than good.

“Our study is the first to analyze parental supply of alcohol and its effects in detail in the long term, and finds that it is, in fact, associated with risks when compared to teenagers not given alcohol,” said lead author Richard Mattick. “This reinforces the fact that alcohol consumption leads to harm, no matter how it is supplied. We advise that parents should avoid supplying alcohol to their teenagers if they wish to reduce their risk of alcohol-related harms.”

The study followed approximately 1,900 parents and teens ages 12-18 years old in three major Australian cities. Roughly 15 percent of parents provided alcohol to the younger teens.  By the time the teens were 18, nearly 60 percent of parents were giving alcohol to their children.

While accounting for factors such as gender, age, and household income, the study found that children who were provided alcohol by their parents had 2.58 times the odds of binge-drinking the following year, compared to their peers who were not supplied alcohol.

Related: Report Reveals American Teens are Safer Than in Recent Decades 

Further, for the teens who were provided alcohol by their parents as well as by other sources, 81 percent reported binge drinking, defined as consuming more than four drinks at a time.  Comparatively, 62 percent of teens who received alcohol from sources other than their parents reported binge drinking.

The study also found that teens who were supplied alcohol by their parents one year were twice as likely to get it elsewhere the following year.

“Parents, policy makers, and clinicians need to be made aware that parental provision of alcohol is associated with risk, not with protection, to reduce the extent of parental supply in high-income countries, and in low-middle-income countries that are increasingly embracing the consumption of alcohol,” Mattick said in the news release.

MANDEL: Banned from campus, groups with divergent views fight back

TORONTO – In the padded cells that are our current universities, there’s no room for clubs who are anti-abortion or who refuse to acknowledge “the patriarchy.”

There’s no room for debate. No place for divergent views contrary to their own orthodoxies.

The student unions at Ryerson, University of Toronto Mississauga, the University of Ontario Institute of Technology and Durham College refused to authorize three clubs who run afoul of current delicate political correctness: two are pro-life and a third is a men’s rights group. Now these banned heretics have gone to court, backed by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, to fight the “bad faith and bias” that has denied them official status on campus.

Justice Centre lawyer Marty Moore was in Superior Court Wednesday to argue the student associations keep changing the rules of entry to block these groups over their currently unpopular views. He urged Justice Paul Perell to order the associations to accredit the three clubs as a matter of “natural justice.”

“Student unions’ actions against students with differing ideological perspectives is stifling democratic discussion and debate on campus, where diversity of opinion is supposed to flourish,” he argued in a factum filed earlier with the court.

Without official sanction, clubs can’t get student union funding and can’t advertise, book rooms and information tables, or host speakers and debates on campus, he said. They’re essentially pariahs without a voice.


MANDEL: Banned from campus, groups with divergent views fight back

German judge removes cross during trial of Muslim migrant for attempted murder of migrant who converted to Christianity

A German judge has caused outrage at a trial in Bavaria, for removing a crucifix from his court room at the request the Muslim asylum-seeker. The Afghan man is suspected of threatening to kill a fellow countryman, for converting to Christianity.


The Muslim migrant on trial attempted to murder an apostate, a migrant who had for left Islam and converted to Christianity. The judge in the trial removed the cross in order to show respect and “religious tolerance”. If you following the judge’s thinking to it’s obvious conclusion, why should this devout Muslim stand trial at all? Killing apostates is commanded under Islam, it is a religious imperative. Isn’t prosecuting him for attempted murder religiously intolerant of Islam?


A German judge has caused outrage at a trial in Bavaria, for removing a crucifix from his court room at the request the Muslim asylum-seeker. The Afghan man is suspected of threatening to kill a fellow countryman, for converting to Christianity.

Canada: Trial starts for Muslim refugee who sexually assaulted 6 underage girls at waterpark

Source: Edmonton Mall sexual assault trial: Traumatized 14 year old victim describes alleged groping (Day 1) – The Rebel

The West Edmonton Mall sex assault trial starts today, and I’m in the courtroom bringing you the details you won’t hear in the mainstream media.

Soleiman Hajj Soleiman was one of Justin Trudeau’s first wave of 50,000 Syrian refugees.

He’s a father of six, currently facing trial for 12 charges— six counts of sexual assault and another six counts of sexual interference against six minor girls all under the age of 16.

The charges stem from a series of gropings that occurred at West Edmonton Mall World Waterpark February 4th 2017.

There’s a publication ban covering the six minor victims but watch as I share what I can tell you so far from day one of this five-day trial.


“A 20-year-old Brampton man,” the Canadian Press reported Tuesday, “is facing dozens of charges, including seven counts of attempted murder, in what police describe as a string of unprovoked, random shootings in Toronto that narrowly missed being fatal.” As it turns out, this could have been a series of jihad attacks, but you will never learn that from the Canadian Press, or from Canadian authorities.

Toronto Police Supt. Ron Taverner was just glad that the shooter hadn’t done more damage: “We’re lucky that we’re not dealing with potentially seven homicides or more.” However, he had no idea why he was dealing with seven attempted homicides: “I wish we could say we had a motive, but we don’t.” He added:  “It’s mind-boggling, quite frankly. We haven’t been able to determine any motive whatsoever that these are other than random shootings.”

Yes, it is indeed mind-boggling. The “20-year-old Brampton man” turns out to be named Adam Abdi. Abdi means servant, as in servant of Allah, and is a common name for Muslims worldwide. Adam Abdi is, therefore, likely Muslim, and could be carrying out the Islamic State’s call to murder civilians in Western countries. The Islamic State issued this call in September 2014:

So O muwahhid, do not let this battle pass you by wherever you may be. You must strike the soldiers, patrons, and troops of the tawaghit. Strike their police, security, and intelligence members, as well as their treacherous agents. Destroy their beds. Embitter their lives for them and busy them with themselves. If you can kill a disbelieving American or European — especially the spiteful and filthy French — or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be….If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman, or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him….

Abdi could also simply be following the Qur’an’s injunctions to “kill them wherever you find them” (2:191, 4:89, 9:5).

If Adam Abdi is not Muslim, but some random psychopath, then Taverner should say so, so as to allay suspicions among the people that these could be jihad attacks. But Taverner cannot do that, because to do so would be to acknowledge that Muslims do sometimes kill in the name of Islam and in accord with its teachings, and it is impossible for Taverner to acknowledge such a thing, however obvious a fact it may be, in today’s atmosphere of totalitarian radio silence about such facts in Canada.


And if Adam Abdi is indeed a Muslim, then Taverner and his team should begin investigating whether or not he was motivated by jihad imperative. But that also he cannot do, because it, too, would be tantamount to admitting that there is a jihad imperative in the first place.

So we get this: a man who is likely a Muslim shoots random people at a time when a major international Islamic jihad terror organization has called for the killing of random people, and the police tell us nothing about the man, and say they’re scratching their heads as to his motive — something we have seen police forces around the world do when confronted with jihad attacks and plots that they don’t want to admit to be what they are. And we may never know what really happened with Adam Abdi and these shootings.

The victims deserve better, but in Canada, as in many quarters all over the West, Islam’s image must be protected at all costs, and that is the first and foremost priority that all authorities must pursue. The victims’ rights and well-being can go hang, as far as the authorities are concerned.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His new book is Confessions of an Islamophobe. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.


This weekend women across the country are dusting off their pussyhats for another march for women. Rallies are scheduled for January 20 and 21 on the anniversary of the Women’s March on Washington. It was the largest single day protest in American history and everyone is still trying to figure out what their actual grievances were. It was in fact an Anti-Trump protest in pink clothing. It has been a year since grown women dressed like giant vaginas and carried illustrated signs that read: ‘Get Your Politics Out of my Pussy’; ‘The Pussy is watching’; ‘My Pussy My Choice’; ‘Stay Cunty’; ‘Pussy Trumps Tyranny’; ‘Not My Pussydent’; ‘Fear The Pussy’; ‘Viva la Vulva’ and other signs with the words; cunt, twat, and fuck. Celebrities ranted about menstrual blood, blowing up the White House and gave speeches praising traitors, terrorists, and cop killers.

These self-proclaimed defenders of women’s rights hold on to their bottomless pit of hatred against the president despite their own leaders being exposed as exploiters of other women. These empty headed mean girls of every age bully conservative women and emasculate all the men in their lives then march to whine about their oppression. All the while ignoring honor violence, sexual slavery, female genital mutilation, human trafficking and real oppression of women. These spoiled angry, unhappy and uninformed ladies of luxury, who wear pink hats and invisible blinders, epitomize the failure of the feminist movement.

They are an insult to every real feminist from suffragettes to those on the front lines risking their lives fighting for their sisters in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Many of whom are denied the most basic of human rights and self-determination. They are an insult to women in America fighting against real sexual discrimination, domestic violence, exploitation and the ignorance of liberal women. These so-called freedom fighters regularly get manicures and pedicures from women who are forced to work in nail salons 12 hours a day without pay. Their fight for immigration stems solely on their heartfelt fear of losing their hard to find housekeepers and nannies.

They are anti-Trump protesters in pussy clothing. For most of these women the protests are just another version of a mean girls party. By marginalizing and bullying conservative women they get to be a part of the popular clique for the first time in their lives. Pussy hats are the quintessential symbol of the failure of feminism. Grown women wearing bright pink children’s hats with pussycat ears epitomizes their arrested development. It is not a symbol of empowerment it is a symbol of collective dependence. Pussyhats signify childishness not maturity, conformity not resistance, divisiveness not solidarity, spectacle not protest. They are political Barbie dolls in pink hats trying to give meaning to their empty plastic boring lives by bashing President Trump. In-crowd membership requires spewing anti-Trump talking points, pledging to always vote democrat and emasculating their husbands. The women who choose to dress as giant vaginas at the marches simply have more issues than there is room to describe in this article.

Pink Hats are the protesters uniform. ‘Nasty Woman’ is their battle cry.  Ashley Judd’s infamous reading of Nina Donovan’s poem ‘I’m a Nasty Woman’ at last year’s march epitomized Trump Derangement Syndrome. Judd was attempting to be the feminist version of a shock jock when she dramatically read:

“I’m a nasty woman — a loud, vulgar, proud woman…..”I am nasty like my bloodstains on my bed sheets. ….. Is your erection really more than protecting the sacred messy part of my womanhood? Is the bloodstain on my jeans more embarrassing than the thinning of your hair? “And our pussies ain’t for grabbing. There for reminding you that our walls are stronger than America’s ever will be. Our pussies are for our pleasure. They are for birthing new generations of filthy, vulgar, nasty, proud, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh, you name it, for new generations of nasty women. So if you a nasty woman, or you love one who is, let me hear you say, hell yeah.” This juvenile embarrassing version of trash talk was designed to dismiss and discredit President Trump while making Judd appear young, hip and cool. Nasty woman is the grown-up version of mean girls. These women are the leaders of the cliques, rallying mean girls to bully their latest target.


The truly despicable women are the Queen Bees epitomized by Hillary Clinton, Linda Sarsour and Meryl Streep. ‘Queen Bees’ are women who do not mind living in a man’s world as long as they can hold power and position in it. Unlike mean girls and nasty women, cliques, popularity and protests are just a means to an end. They do not want to empower women, just the opposite, they perpetuate institutionalized sexism, so they can use it to their advantage.  To earn power, these women exploit women’s issues, protect sexual predators and step on the heads of other women even if they are wearing pussyhats.

Hillary not only protected and defended her sexual predator husband but attacked the women who came forward. Linda Sarsour, the controversial Muslim activist and organizer of last year’s Women’s March, bullied an underling to cover up sex-abuse allegations. She humiliated the woman by claiming that sexual abuse does not happen to women who are fat and defended the abuser as a God-fearing man who was always at the Mosque. In addition to protecting a sexual predator Sarsour is enforcing Islamic Sharia law. Meryl Streep pretended that she did not know movie mogul Harvey Weinstein was a sexual predator. Streep who appeared in several Weinstein backed films was called out by Rose McGowan one of the first women to accuse Weinstein of sexual misconduct. McGowan wrote ‘your silence is the problem and added that Streep, and other actress, ‘happily worked for The Pig Monster.’

Queen Bees operate out of self-interest. They are ‘daughters of the patriarchy’ protecting male-controlled power structures so they can take their place in it. These women believe if they follow the male rules that they will be allowed into the club, the rare exceptions who knew how to maneuver the system. Hillary became the perfect example of what happens to these gender traitors. They are not rewarded with powerful positions they are discarded for younger women and take a back seat to minority men also seeking power. Queen Bees do not care about women or the concept of sisterhood, hence they subsequently end up bitter angry unhappy women who finally realized that they were no different than the women they exploited while climbing the patriarchal ladder to success.

The latest phase of feminism is referred to as the third wave and encompasses ‘intersectional’ LGBT black feminism. It is epitomized by the Black Live Matter Movement. Radical Black feminists stress the perceived failures of second-wave feminism that over-emphasized the experiences of upper middle class white women. Hence, white feminists have to leave their privilege at the door. This is the epitome of feminist class and race warfare, that pits women against women and is another clear failure of the feminist movement. In fighting and childish pettiness are other common failures of the movement. This is evident in a dispute over the symbolism of pussyhats brought to our attention by Daniel Greenfield. “The sentiment that the pink pussyhat excludes and is offensive to transgender women and gender nonbinary people who don’t have typical female genitalia and to women of color because their genitals are more likely to be brown than pink.” and “The Pink P*ssy Hat reinforces the notion that woman = vagina and vagina = woman, and both of these are incorrect. Additionally, the Pink P*ssy Hat is white-focused and Eurocentric in that it assumes that all vaginas are pink; this is also an incorrect assertion.” Tthe feminist movement has devolved into the identity politics of pussyhats and these women wonder why they are not being taken seriously.

Ultimately these organized Women’s Marches are filled with pink sheep being used by black sheep who are being set up for slaughter by Queen Bees. Welcome to the revolution.

Solomons’ police monitoring new cargo-cult-like group

Police in Solomon Islands say they are closely monitoring a new cargo-cult religious group in Malaita Province.


The group called ‘Kingdom’ is christianity-based but holds some controversial beliefs.

The Solomon Star newspaper reports local Christian associations do not recognise the movement with one local pastor describing it as a cargo-cult because it reportedly tells members they will receive goods and money from the US.

He said the group believes the people of Malaita are descendants of Israel and that today the ground would open up and swallow all unbelievers and houses will spring up out of the ground for the faithful to occupy and be served by white women.

In a statement Solomon Islands police said they were closely monitoring the ‘Kingdom’ movement.

The police commander for Malaita Province, Timothy Apaesi, is calling for local communities to assist with information gathering on reports that there may be an uprising which could result in public disorder.

People with information on the movement can get in touch with Auki Police on local numbers 40132 or 40489.

They can also contact the RSIPF Communication Centre on phone 23666 or the police toll free 999.

German city uses taxpayer funds to promote wearing the burqa

“German city promotes wearing the burqa using taxpayer money,” Voice of Europe, January 17, 2018:

The Adult Education Centre (VHS) in Dresden will present a course next summer called: Dress codes in Islam. Participants can test burqas and other ‘women oppressing’ Islamic garments.

According to the course book “colourful headgears make curious about the wearers” and people can try out “how a burqa feels”.

The initiative is criticised by Muslim feminist Seyran Ates, who thinks that the course consolidates the traditional role of women in Islam. “The language used in the description of the course uncritically diminishes the worldviews behind the cover: a society in which the sexes are as far apart as possible”, she said….

A spokeswoman of the education centre says “that she sees it as a place of integration. The course is “value-free” and serves citizens to form an opinion.”…The event is funded with taxpayer money from the City of Dresden.

Hungary Seeks to Punish those Who Aid Illegal Migration

BUDAPEST, Hungary (AP) — A new set of laws would tax and possibly sanction Hungarian groups assisting illegal migration which receive foreign funding, Hungary’s government said Wednesday.

Such groups would have to register with the courts and pay a 25-percent tax on funds received from abroad, Interior Minister Sandor Pinter said. Groups failing to register, and which authorities consider to be adding illegal migrants, could be fined.

Pinter, without mentioning anyone by name, gave an example of someone providing a smartphone containing maps and other information “showing the way to Europe” to a migrant in Belgrade, the capital of Serbia, and part of the “Balkan route” migrants use to try to reach Germany and other destinations in Western Europe.

Also, restraining orders could be issued against Hungarian citizens considered to be “organizing illegal migration,” preventing them from going within eight kilometers (five miles) of Hungary’s Schengen borders, those with countries outside the European Union, like Serbia and Ukraine. Foreigners found to be aiding illegal migrants could be banned from Hungary, Pinter said.


Government spokesman Zoltan Kovacs said the expectations were that Hungarian non-governmental groups “which deal with illegal migrants or the issue of migration will follow the law and indicate to authorities … that they are doing this activity.”

The new laws would apparently not apply to, for example, religious charity groups or the Red Cross, which distribute food, medicines and other aid to migrants.

“Giving assistance is not the same as actively … taking part in someone crossing the border illegally,” Kovacs said.

Prime Minister Viktor Orban is an opponent of immigration, especially by Muslims, and Hungary built long fences along its southern borders in late 2015 to stop the flow of migrants.

The government has dubbed the bills “Stop Soros” laws, as it blames Hungarian-American billionaire and philanthropist George Soros for Europe’s migration challenges, partly because of his funding of groups that advocate for the rights of refugees.

The Hungarian Helsinki Committee, a rights group which provides legal aid to asylum-seekers and receives part of its funding from Soros’ Open Society Foundations, drew attention to the government’s proposed eight-kilometer restraining order and compared it to a 1969 decree by Hungary’s then-communist government prohibiting citizens from going nearer than two kilometers (1.2 miles) from the borders