Assimilation is no longer 'possible': British commentator warns that the West has imported too many culturally incompatible migrants



When a country welcomes an overwhelming number of people from different cultures, those men and women no longer feel any need to become part of the nation they have joined.

BlazeTV host Nick Freitas and British commentator Rafe Heydel-Mankoo have both seen this transform Western countries — and it all started with a melting-pot message.

“I grew up in a time where we heard constantly through education, even through conservative educational institutions, that we are a nation of immigrants. ‘We’re a nation of immigrants’; that got hammered into us,” Freitas says.

“There’s an element of truth to that,” he continues. “But from 1607 to 1776, we were English colonies. And if you look at the vast majority of our immigration, it came from the British Isles.”

Freitas points out that those immigrants were almost exclusively Protestant.

“The assimilation was incredible because it was almost as if everyone understood what they were coming to and the purpose for which they were coming,” he explains.

However, “all of a sudden,” the United States has had “mass importation over the last, arguably, 60 years.”

“We started to mass-import people from vastly different cultures. That it was almost like we were commanded to believe that no, that this is who we’ve always been,” Freitas explains.

“And if you don’t believe that, if you don’t believe that America is nothing more than a propositional civilization, well, then you’re a racist or you’re a xenophobe or you’re a bigot,” he adds.

Mankoo has seen this happening in Britain as well.

“It’s to our fault that we have, for too long, self-flagellated about Britain’s past and Britain’s history. And you need to have a very robust promotion of what you believe is the prevailing, unifying culture,” he tells Freitas.

“But unfortunately,” he continues, “I don’t think assimilation is possible any longer in the United Kingdom, because we have imported such vast numbers of peoples from culturally incompatible lands that they now have enclaves large enough that they never need to engage with wider society.”

“Their daily lives pass with little to no engagement with anybody else,” he adds.

“Making the Argument with Nick Freitas” is available on BlazeTV+, YouTube, and major podcast platforms.

Start watching Nick Freitas NOW at blazetv.com and use the promo code NICK for $20 off your BlazeTV+ subscription.

Where in the world is Flávio Bolsonaro?



Flávio Bolsonaro has reportedly fled to the United States after narrowly losing Brazil's presidential election under unusual circumstances and after Brazil's left-wing government demanded he surrender his passports.

Bolsonaro, son of convicted former President Jair Bolsonaro, has left Brazil for the U.S., two sources told CNN Tuesday. A U.S. official then seemingly confirmed the report, telling the outlet that Bolsonaro was headed for Florida before stating that his destination was unclear, CNN said.

'Do not recognize these elections.'

Reuters, citing three sources, reported that he had left Brazil for the U.S. One source even said that the Trump administration had granted asylum to Bolsonaro and his immediate family, the outlet reported.

"After months of intense work that has been unfairly thwarted, I am not in the mood to speak to the press," said Paulo Figueiredo, an unofficial family spokesman.

Bolsonaro lost Sunday's runoff to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva by about 3.6 points after Supreme Court Justice Cristiano Zanin extended voting by two hours, stirring fraud suspicions. Zanin was Lula's personal defense lawyer until Lula put him on the court in 2023.

Lula was previously found guilty of corruption and money-laundering charges. He spent over 550 days in prison before he was freed in 2019. The Supreme Court annulled his convictions in 2021 on jurisdictional grounds.

The elder Bolsonaro is serving a 27-year sentence under house arrest for what some claim was a political hit job. Flávio Bolsonaro also faces allegations of money laundering and other crimes.

"It is impossible to accept the result of the elections under these conditions," Flávio Bolsonaro said Sunday night, vowing to seek annulment.

RELATED: Feds arrest 6 alleged fraudsters in Maine health care scandal

Mark Wilson/Getty Images

"Do not recognize these elections," Eduardo Bolsonaro, Flávio's brother, said in an X video. On Tuesday, Eduardo called reports that his brother had absconded a "lie," CNN reported.

Justice Alexandre de Moraes signed a sealed order the night of the presidential election demanding that Bolsonaro surrender his passports. The order also prohibited Bolsonaro from leaving Brazil.

Federal Police canceled the passports Tuesday amid reports that Bolsonaro had fled the country, according to CNN.

Argentina's Infobae reported that Bolsonaro crossed into the Misiones province to take a private jet, though this report remains unconfirmed. Argentina said it has "no record" of him entering.

“The process is confidential. We do not have any information,” Brazil's Supreme Court told Blaze News when asked about Moraes' passport confiscation order.

The State Department and U.S. Customs and Border Protection did not respond to Blaze News' requests for comment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

First livestream of execution by firing squad might be scrapped — Trump and Vance aren't won over



The United States is about to make history as it prepares to televise the first-ever execution by firing squad. Former U.S. Army Major Nidal Hasan will be put to death this December for a heinous crime committed in 2009. But while the original plan was to show the event to the world, the Trump administration is locked in a debate that could take the execution off air before it even happens.

A formal execution has never been aired on TV in the United States. The most recent public execution happened in 1936 in Kentucky after Rainey Bethea raped and killed a 70-year-old woman. He was hanged for his crimes, and since the first public broadcast network didn’t arrive until several years later, the only way to witness the event was in person. Needless to say, we’re in uncharted waters.

The broadcast could be used against the United States.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth gave the green light for the public execution, telling Jack Posobiec in an interview, “We’ll make sure that people are able to watch it, that it’s public, because people need to understand that there’s serious consequences for these types of things.”

These “things” Hegseth refers to are the 13 U.S. Army members that Hasan murdered on November 5, 2009. Hasan was later charged and convicted of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder. He was ultimately sentenced to death days later.

The execution will take place right back at the scene of the crime. On December 3, 2026, at 1 p.m. Central Time, Nidal Hasan will die at the hands of a firing squad. While lethal injection is usually the first option to carry out a humane death sentence, firing squads are still common in the U.S., with the latest execution taking place as recently as 2025.

The public execution of Nidal Hasan was meant to air on television and be available on streaming platforms in December. However, a new report reveals that the Trump administration is still debating the morality of putting a man to death in front of the entire world.

Vice President JD Vance has said he won't watch a livestreamed event, while Trump is reportedly cool to the streaming idea; according to ABC News, some within the administration fear that the broadcast could be used against the United States as anti-American propaganda or fuel for Islamic extremists, or that it could simply reflect poorly on the nation. The situation looks even worse considering Hasan was paralyzed during the murders in 2009, leaving him confined to a wheelchair. Visually, killing a disabled man on TV would not play well.

Despite internal discussions, the Pentagon insists that the execution will be carried out on air as planned. A list of supported TV channels and streaming services has not been finalized yet. However, some services have already pre-emptively barred the content from their platforms, including TikTok and Newsmax. Specific viewing details should be available as we get closer to the execution.

RELATED: The Fort Hood shooter is the ‘victim’ now as media compares execution to ‘lynchings’

Sara Gonzales Unfiltered

In terms of the legality of the event, the FCC has strict laws that govern the content available on TV. Specifically, stations can’t display indecent or obscene material, nor can they propagate hoaxes or distort the news. One thing dubiously absent from regulatory scrutiny is violence. Violent content is protected on TV under free speech laws. That means a public execution is technically within the FCC’s rules.

Furthermore, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr has made no threats to get in the way. In fact, he left the final decision to air the execution to Hegseth. So as long as the Trump administration sorts out its internal disagreement, the event will be available for all to watch.

The only question now is: Should you watch it?

Legally, the death penalty is a just process sanctioned by 27 U.S. states and the federal government. At least some of biblical Scripture supports the death penalty as well. Genesis 9:6 states, “Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind." Spiritually — as in for the sake of your soul — it may be best not to tune in.

Just because the death penalty is legal and righteous doesn’t mean that it’s meant for the entire world to see. Watching someone’s life be taken siphons away a bit of one’s own soul in kind, and the spiritual trade-off isn’t worth the cost.

Without any more details, there is no way to know exactly how brutal the event will appear on TV. That said, the forceful end of a life is still a vicious death. Children definitely shouldn’t watch the event, and if you wish to protect your soul, you shouldn’t watch it either.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The tyranny of tipping



America is synonymous with a peculiar list of cultural exports: Coca-Cola, Bruce Springsteen, peanut butter on everything, monster trucks, prescription drug commercials with terrifying side effects, and, of course, tipping.

I remember the first time I visited the United States, some 16 years ago, shortly after finishing high school. Coming from a country where leaving a few spare coins on the table was considered high praise, the whole business felt like navigating a Vietnamese minefield.

The actual employers are nowhere in sight while customers and workers fight over spare change like gladiators in an arena made of iPad swivel stands.

I was genuinely shocked to discover that tipping wasn’t an optional nod to genuinely exceptional service. No, like breathing and blinking, it was mandatory.

Tapped out

For my first few weeks in your great nation, I harbored a genuine fear that the FBI would burst through my door and drag me away to a federal penitentiary unless I gave a generous 20% to every human who handed me a donut.

Many visitors find this arrangement odd, even tyrannical. Back home, if someone hands you a cup of coffee, they hand you the coffee, you pay the price listed on the board, and everyone moves on with their lives. Nobody looks at you like you just insulted their lineage because you didn't pay an extra three dollars for the act of turning a paper cup around.

Americans themselves appear to be getting fed up. A 2026 LendingTree survey found that a quarter of consumers are tipping less as they cut restaurant spending amid higher food costs. Other polling points directly at the mechanism driving everyone insane: Two-thirds of Americans say they feel pressured to tip when a digital payment screen displaying suggested amounts is visible to the employee.

Screen-grab

That payment screen is the real villain of this decade. You used to tip a waiter at a booth or a valet who drove your car. In 2026, you face a digital tablet turned toward you at a self-service bakery, a dry cleaner, and a drive-thru window. The cashier presses a button, spins the screen around with a practiced flip of the wrist, and stares directly into both your eyes and your soul.

The screen offers four giant preset buttons: 18%, 20%, 25%, or “Custom.” Finding the “No Tip” option requires a master’s degree in user interface design and the shamelessness of a Scientologist. You stand there panicking, aware that three people in line behind you are also casting judgment. You hit 20% not because it’s necessarily the right thing to do but because it’s the quickest way to escape with some level of dignity.

America has built an economy where basic human transactions increasingly require a tax on awkwardness. The logic of the system vanished long ago. You step up to a counter, a worker reaches two inches to the left, grabs a bag of chips, hands it to you, and suddenly you are expected to subsidize the worker's salary. The actual employers are nowhere in sight while customers and workers fight over spare change like gladiators in an arena made of iPad swivel stands.

Customer servitude

The history behind this custom is darker than you might expect. Tipping migrated to the United States from Europe in the 19th century, adopted in part by wealthy Americans eager to imitate European aristocratic manners. It was not warmly received. Newspapers and labor activists denounced the practice as un-American, servile, and little better than bribery. By 1915, several states had banned it.

Employers, however, discovered an obvious advantage: Tips allowed customers to shoulder part of the payroll. The notorious Pullman Company paid its mostly black porters miserable wages while expecting passengers to make up the difference. Restaurants likewise came to rely heavily on gratuities. The anti-tipping laws didn't last; by the 1920s, they had been repealed or struck down.

A version of that arrangement survives in federal law today. In states that allow the full federal tip credit, an employer can pay a tipped worker as little as $2.13 an hour in direct wages, provided wages and tips together reach at least the federal minimum wage.

And now we have somehow expanded tipping beyond the occupations on which this peculiar system was built. The prompt appears whether anyone carried your bags, waited on your table, parked your car, or did much of anything beyond operating a cash register.

RELATED: America’s young are being recruited into socialism — one dance party at a time

Bettman/Michael Tullberg/Getty Images

Turning Japanese

Better alternatives exist worldwide, and they manage without subjecting every purchase to a moral referendum. Japan has essentially no everyday tipping culture; the country’s own tourism authority warns that attempting to tip can cause confusion or discomfort. Across much of Europe, gratuities tend to be smaller, less automatic, and less central to how service workers are paid.

You see a price. You pay it. Everyone survives.

Now, I know I‘m not American, so telling you how to run your country can sound offensive. That is not my intention. You have built a remarkable nation that gave us jazz, the moon landing, road trips, sitcoms, backyard barbecues, Clint Eastwood, Britney Spears with hair and without, and avocado toast.

I am simply a genuine fan and frequent visitor who would prefer to buy an espresso without being asked to subsidize the payroll or shell out a small ransom for an already overpriced blueberry muffin.

DHS may slam immigration 'back door' shut with new $70,000 fee



A program identified by the Trump administration as a potential significant source of fraud may be getting a major overhaul.

Last Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security announced a proposed rule that could change a major "pipeline" for nonimmigrant students to get jobs in the United States.

'A $70,000 university-paid fee could dramatically shrink it and potentially make OPT unworkable for a large number of international graduates.'

The DHS has proposed a new rule regarding the Optional Practical Training, a contingent program often used by nonimmigrant students with F-1 visas to find temporary employment within the United States.

If finalized, the new rule would place a significant financial burden on universities if and when they decide to recommend a student for OPT.

“Optional Practical Training was never meant to be a back door into the American workforce, a subsidy for cheap labor, or a prize for those who game the system,” a DHS spokesperson said in a press release.

“DHS is upskilling OPT to require foreign students to justify their worth to employers. American workers should not have to compete against a program that has been turned into a pipeline for cheap foreign labor.”

RELATED: JD Vance announces MASSIVE crackdown on companies and universities replacing Americans with foreigners

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The higher barrier would, the administration argues, potentially decrease the amount of fraud within the program, which has reportedly suffered issues such as "problematic worksites and 'pay-to-stay' visa schemes."

The new rule would also add an extra $30,000 fee for additional OPT windows, meaning a student who is granted OPT, for example, during their program and again after the completion of their program would need to have the university recommend him or her both times and pay the base $70,000 plus the additional $30,000 fee.

The rule and the press release emphasize that the fees would be connected not to the employers to which these students are sent, but to the universities who are recommending them.

According to the proposal, the fees collected will be deposited in the Treasury of the United States.

Many have called for an overhaul of the OPT program for a significant amount of time, not least among them Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.).

In November 2025, Sen. Schmitt highlighted the "severe problems" with the OPT program, and his request to re-evaluate the program gained some traction within the Trump administration.

Schmitt called the OPT program, which was established through DHS regulations rather than a statute, a "back door into the U.S. job market for foreign workers," adding that it "incentivizes colleges to become 'visa mills.'"

Then-DHS Secretary Kristi Noem replied to Sen. Schmitt at the beginning of this year, writing that DHS was re-evaluating the program.

Rahul Reddy, an immigration lawyer at Reddy Neumann Brown PC, stressed that this was an "extraordinary" change that could possibly go into effect around graduation season next year.

"In practical terms, the proposal does not formally abolish OPT," Reddy wrote. "But a $70,000 university-paid fee could dramatically shrink it and potentially make OPT unworkable for a large number of international graduates."

The DHS will accept public comments before the rule is made final. Members of the public can view the proposed rule on the Federal Register website and submit comments until November 9.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump pays homage to Columbus, unveils special tribute from Italy



For years, President Trump has called for Christopher Columbus to be returned to his place among the respected, great men who are part of this nation's history.

And his speech just days before Columbus Day was the latest of his defiant pronouncements against those who hate America's history.

'We're going to place it in a very special place of honor.'

On Friday, President Trump hosted a celebration of Christopher Columbus at the White House in the latest of his efforts to rehabilitate the 15th-century Italian explorer whose memory and legacy have been maligned in recent years by the woke left.

Trump, however, has long been a staunch supporter of Christopher Columbus and his legacy, even calling for the U.S. to "BRING BACK COLUMBUS DAY" four years ago. In April 2025, he posted on Truth Social that he would bring Columbus Day "back from the ashes" after the "Democrats did everything possible to destroy" him, including the destruction of his statues.

During his speech Friday, Trump echoed a number of these sentiments and made some important announcements in his efforts to rehabilitate Columbus Day.

“Christopher Columbus changed the future of humanity forever. And in this administration, we know that Christopher Columbus is — to us, he’s a hero. He’s a hero," Trump said.

RELATED: Social studies teacher vandalizes Christopher Columbus statue

Trump told the story of Baltimore's statue of Columbus, "made from the finest Italian marble," which faced the city's Little Italy.

"But on July 4, 2020, a hate-filled mob of radical left lunatics and Marxists, communists lashed chains around Columbus' neck," toppled the statue to the ground, and dumped the broken remains into Baltimore Harbor, he said.

“They want to tear down the history and heritage that makes us who we are, not only Columbus," Trump reminded the audience at Friday's event.

The fragments were quickly recovered by Italian-Americans, and a restored version of the statue, using the fragments of the destroyed statue from Baltimore, was placed outside the Eisenhower Executive Office Building near the White House earlier this year. Trump said last month he placed it there "in Honor of the Italian American Community" — a common theme during Friday's event as well.

President Trump indicated that there was another surprise — but he hadn't seen it yet.

Trump introduced Brett Rugo during the speech and explained that Rugo had presented the White House with "a one-of-a-kind 19th-century statue of Christopher Columbus from Italy."

He told the crowd that he had not seen the statue yet. He asked the audience what they thought of it, and many gave signs of approval.

Trump went on to explain the plans for the statue: "We're going to be bringing Brett's [statue] over to the Rose Garden, and we're going to place it in a very special place of honor."

“While I’m president of the United States, we’ll always honor and celebrate the immortal legends," Trump said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

‘UK Democracy Has an Upper Hand’: Abdul El-Sayed Praised British Government as Superior to United States

Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed praised the British democratic system as superior to America's in a 2010 op-ed, arguing that the British system is better because it allows ethnic minority groups to concentrate more electoral power.

The post ‘UK Democracy Has an Upper Hand’: Abdul El-Sayed Praised British Government as Superior to United States appeared first on .

Israel’s Growing Allies on the Ground—and in the Sky

Israel is no stranger to diplomatic isolation, but the widespread condemnation it has received after the October 7 atrocities has been unusually strong and meritless. Last week, the dozens of delegates walking out on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech at the United Nations seemed to dramatize Israel's diplomatic plight. Bibi defied the well-heeled "moral cowards" of Turtle Bay and defended his policies against Iran and its terrorist minions. But even as many of Israel's friends applauded him at the rostrum, their eyes darted nervously to the swelling exodus in the aisles.

The post Israel’s Growing Allies on the Ground—and in the Sky appeared first on .

The one loophole in Trump’s tariff policy



The Trump administration’s tariff policies have delivered a series of wins for the American people. Ford announced that it would be shifting more production of its Lincoln line from China to the United States. Sapporo, the beer brewer, recently said it would move brewing from Canada to south of the border.

The tariff agenda has been pursued using a wide array of tools. Many, including steel tariffs, have come by way of Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act. Steel and aluminum tariffs of some sort date back to Trump’s first presidency. Former President Joe Biden kept them going, and upon returning to office, President Trump increased them to 50% in some cases.

The loophole is pushing America’s retailers toward cheaper, foreign-filled canned food.

These tariffs helped to support a domestic steel industry that had fallen on tough times and whose weakness had turned the Steel Belt to the Rust Belt.

The strategy is clear: make foreign production more expensive, particularly in countries that regularly cheat, like China, in order to encourage companies to reshore in the United States. This will result in more jobs, weaker adversaries, more government revenue, and a stronger economy.

There is only one problem: There’s a loophole in the steel tariffs. The tariffs include tinplate steel, a type of thinner steel used to hold canned foods. Practically all of the cans of soup, fruit, vegetables, and fish that Americans purchase are made with tinplate steel. Tariffing tinplate steel in itself is no problem, as it fits in with broader goals of the administration. But in the current tariff landscape, cans manufactured in America and filled with foods grown by American farmers face much higher levies than cans produced overseas and filled with foreign-sourced foods.

It’s these imported canned foods that increasingly show up on American grocery store shelves, outcompeting against foods made in America.

The resulting issues this creates are obvious. The loophole is pushing America’s retailers toward cheaper, foreign-filled canned food. However, foreign food, especially in places like China, can be far less healthy or safe, since food safety regulations in those countries are far less stringent than in the United States.

This loophole weakens the Trump administration’s Make America Healthy Again agenda. It also directly benefits foreign competitors over domestic producers, both in terms of the tinplate steel that goes into making canned goods and the food found within them. This tariff on tinplate also shifts production and jobs overseas, at a time when American farmers, food processors, and manufacturers are capable of supplying the same products domestically.

RELATED: How Trump got Washington to think about the national debt

NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP/Getty Images

Fortunately, the loophole can be easily corrected: Apply the same Section 232 treatment to the steel in imported finished food cans that applies to imported tinplate steel, using the authority President Trump has already granted to the secretary of commerce and the U.S. trade representative. It will align with the administration’s broader tariff goals and support domestic steel producers.

This fix should not be difficult. Steel producers and manufacturers want to make their products in the United States. U.S. Steel, which was just saved by the Trump administration, is reopening a tinplate steel mill in Gary, Indiana, next year. But as long as this loophole persists, other companies will have trouble following U.S. Steel’s lead. And Americans will continue, in an effort to save money, to be directed toward foreign-filled food cans.

If the administration wants companies to invest, reshore, and produce in America, it’s time to stop giving foreign-filled food cans the advantage. The steel tariff should follow the steel, whether it arrives as an empty can or inside a finished food product.