Friday, June 1, 2018

Denmark Approves Burka Ban

Denmark Approves Burka Ban

by Soeren Kern  •  June 1, 2018 at 6:00 am
Facebook  Twitter  Addthis  Send  Print
  • Denmark becomes the sixth European country to enact such a ban, after France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Bulgaria and Austria.
  • "The face is your passport. When you refuse me to see you, I am a victim." — Jacques Myard, a former conservative MP who supported the ban in France.
  • "[S]ome people do not want to be a part of Danish society and want to create parallel societies with their own norms and rules." — Danish Justice Minister Søren Pape Poulsen.
(Copenhagen photo by Pixabay)
The Danish Parliament has passed a ban on Islamic full-face veils in public spaces. The new law, sponsored by Denmark's center-right government, and backed by the Social Democrats and the Danish People's Party, was passed on May 31 by 75 votes to 30.
As of August 1, anyone found wearing a burka (which covers the entire face) or a niqab (which covers the entire face except for the eyes) in public in Denmark will be subject to a fine of 1,000 Danish kroner (€135; $157); repeat offenders could be fined 10,000 Danish kroner.
In addition, anyone found to be requiring a person through force or threats to wear garments that cover the face could be fined or face up to two years in prison.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Donate

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: BANNING SEGREGATION OF WOMEN VIOLATES WOMEN'S RIGHTS

 
7
Denmark passed a law banning the burka. The  tent-like garment is a form of mobile purdah, or segregation, that covers the entire body.
 Denmark joined some other European countries in deciding Thursday to ban garments that cover the face, including Islamic veils such as the niqab or burqa.
In a 75-30 vote with 74 absentees, Danish lawmakers approved the law presented by the center-right governing coalition. The government says that it is not aimed at any religions and does not ban headscarves, turbans or the traditional Jewish skull cap.
However, the law is popularly known as the “Burqa Ban” and is mostly seen as being directed at the dress worn by some conservative Muslim women. Few Muslim women in Denmark wear full-face veils.
Austria, France and Belgium have similar laws.
However Amnesty International, an organization that started based on a hoax and which was employed in intelligence operations at one point, is most unhappy. Segregating women violates women's rights.
Following today’s vote by Denmark’s parliament to ban the wearing of face coverings in public, Amnesty International’s Europe Director Gauri van Gulik said:
“All women should be free to dress as they please and to wear clothing that expresses their identity or beliefs. This ban will have a particularly negative impact on Muslim women who choose to wear the niqab or burqa. 
Do women choose to wear the burka? No doubt some do. Others don't. The burka cuts off women from the world and makes it easier for them to be coerced and abused.
But let's begin with what the burka is. 
The burka is different than the hijab which Muslim women wear to distinguish themselves from non-Muslim women, alerting Muslim men that they cannot be molested, but that non-Muslim women can 
“O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies that they may thus be distinguished and not molested.” (Koran 33:59)
One Koranic commentary is quite explicit. “It is more likely that this way they may be recognized (as pious, free women), and may not be hurt (considered by mistake as roving slave girls.)” The Yazidi girls captured and raped by ISIS are an example of “roving slave girls” who can be assaulted by Muslim men.
A French survey found that 77 percent of girls wore the hijab because of threats of Islamist violence. It’s numbers like these that have led to the French ban of the burka and now of the burkini.
Burka means purdah. The purdah is the certain behind which women are segregated in the home. A woman wearing the burka is being segregated in public. She's wearing a curtain so that she can be allowed to move among men.
This is what Amnesty International is defending. ISIS would approve.


VERIZON'S HUFFINGTON POST DOXXES WOMAN FOR BEING RETWEETED BY 

TRUMP

 
2
We've heard a lot of talk about "decency" lately.
Okay, let's talk about decency. Forget namecalling. How about a Verizon owned media group targeting a Twitter user, exposing her full name and location to the terrorists whom she has condemned online because the media group's reporter doesn't like the Twitter user.
And, because Trump once retweeted her.
We're talking about Amy Mek, a prolific Twitter user, who is the subject of a bizarre piece by the Huffington Post's Luke O'Brien titled, "Trump’s Loudest Anti-Muslim Twitter Troll Is A Shady Vegan Married To An (Ousted) WWE Exec."
Sub, "@AmyMek anonymously spread hate online for years. She can’t hide anymore."
So yes, that's doxxing. And it's being conducted by a Verizon company. Verizon bought AOL. And AOL bought Arianna Huffington's cage of trolls and crazies. So the reputational risk is on them. 
Luke repeatedly uses the word, "cruel" in his attack on a Twitter user. A more accurate description of "cruelty" would be targeting a Twitter user, making assorted claims about her personal life, getting her husband fired from his job, because he doesn't like her views.
I don't know much about Amy. I do know that she seems to criticize Islamic terrorism. And some in Islamic and on the left consider that enough to justify terrorizing her.
Amy Mek is a Twitter user. She's not a public figure. Being retweeted by Trump does not make you fair game for exposes. A famous person retweeting you does not make you a public figure.
Except apparently now it does. And the rest of the media which claims to aspire to decency while cheering on the Gawkerites needs to answer as to whether it believes this is ethical journalism?
Verizon shareholders also ought to ask whether the company isn't carrying significant reputational risk through its ownership of the Huffington Post.
Gawker's antics ended with a $140 million verdict and a $31 million settlement. Verizon needs to ask itself if letting its reporters doxx random Twitter users they don't like is worth $31 million or whether it's time to exercise some editorial control over the Huffington Post. 
They also might want to consider whether they really want to let a jury in Fishkill decide this question.
If you're a Verizon shareholder, you can find the company's investor relations contact information here. And you may want to ask them how they plan to shield the company against the reputational risk and legal risks from Huffington Post's dangerous and unethical behavior.


"ALLAHU AKBAR" SHOUTING, AXE-WIELDING SYRIAN KILLS POLICE DOG

 
Diagnosis mental illness. Nothing to do with Islam.
Dutch police have shot a man who was shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’ as he tried to attack them with an axe.
The 26-year-old man was heard screaming the Arabic for ‘Allah is greatest’ while waving the weapon and fatally wounded a police dog.
According to Netherlands news site NU, police entered his apartment after reports of a disturbance on Wednesday afternoon.
During the fighting, officers reportedly tried unsuccessfully to taser the man, who stabbed a police dog.
The police dog that was deployed on Wednesday at the arrest of the armed man from Syria in Schiedam has passed away. The municipality of Schiedam has announced this on Wednesday evening.
"When the dog was transferred to the vet, it went very bad," said the police earlier in the day. The animal was seriously injured in the arrest in a porch house at the Van den Tempelstraat in Schiedam.
The man stood on the street and on the balcony waving an ax and called Allahu Akbar
But it's mental illness.
Schiedam Mayor: 'Man with hatchet probably had psychosis'
Probably.
The man called out 'Allahu akbar' reports the police. But according to Lamers, there were no terrorist motives. The 26-year-old Syrian has lived with his father in Schiedam since 2015. He was '' somewhat familiar '' to aid agencies, but not because of major psychological problems, says the mayor.
''On the contrary. That is why we did not see this escalation coming, "says Lamers against RTV Rijnmond . '' If it is someone who is really confused and has big psychological problems."
It's the Netherlands that has the big problem.

MUELLER INVESTIGATION COST ENOUGH TO FEED OVER 5 MILLION CHILDREN

MUELLER INVESTIGATION COST ENOUGH TO FEED OVER 5 MILLION CHILDREN 

(Democrats Should be Made To pay Every Last Dollar Back To The American People, With INTEREST. So Saith We The American People Who Are So Damn Sick N Tired Of All This Bullshite)

 
4
Whenever the media dislikes a government program (usually involving weapons, because those are the only government programs that lefties dislike), it tells us what we could get for that money.
How many hungry children could you feed for the cost of one stealth bomber?
Okay. How many hungry children could you feed for the cost of the Mueller investigation. Turns out to be a whole lot.
The special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election has cost nearly $17 million dollars so far, according to a new report from the Justice Department.
Correction, it's not an investigation of Russia, but of Trump.
When Mueller busts down the door of the Russian embassy or starts hanging around Moscow, I'll take the Russian part seriously. Or maybe revisits Uranium One.
Earlier this month, President Trump tweeted the probe was a "soon to be $20,000,000 Witch Hunt, composed of 13 Angry and Heavily Conflicted Democrats and two people who have worked for Obama for 8 years, STOP!"
$20 million here we come. And that's without a single indictment based on the actual central justification of this investigation. 
But how many hungry children could you feed for the cost of feeding Team Coup?
In April 2008, USDA released its School Lunch and Breakfast Cost Study-II, which examined the cost of producing a school meal during school year 2005-06.The study found that, on average, the full cost to produce a reimbursable school lunch was $2.91, exceeding the free lunch subsidy, then $2.495.
5 million hungry kids. 

MSNBC'S JOY REID CALLED FORETHNICALLY CLEANSING JEWS FROMISRAEL

 
MSNBC continues to maintain its red wall of silence on Joy Reid. But the ugliness just keeps rising.
The old blog posts by the progressive personality reek of every bigotry that the left claims to condemn. And, as Bre Payton at the Federalist notes, there's even a call to ethnically cleanse Jews from Israel.
Iran's pres strikes again Says "move Israel to Europe"
...
"You believe the Jews were oppressed, why should the Palestinian Muslims have to pay the price? You oppressed them, so give a part of Europe to the Zionist regime so they can establish any government they want. We would support it. So, Germany and Austria, come and give one, two or any number of your provinces to the Zionist regime so they can create a country there... and the problem will be solved at its root."
I hate to admit that Mr. Amadinejad has a point ...
Not only is Joy Reid a a racist, but she's illiterate. So there are two things that qualify her to work at MSNBC.
(and a plurality of the Israelis are former German nationals, plus lower castes consisting of Eastern Europeans, Russians, Sephardic Jews from the Mediterranean and at the bottom of the social pyramid, Falasha Africans ...)
Actually a majority of the Israelis are from the Middle East. Most of them having come from Muslim countries where they were persecuted.
Most Israelis are not and were not German nationals. Eastern Europe would be more on the money early on. Ben Gurion and Netanyahu's father were Polish Jews. As were many other Zionist leaders. Golda Meir was from Ukraine and then Milwaukee. The part of Russia today known as Belarus produced many others. I don't believe that a single Israeli prime minister was a German national or descended from them. German Jews made important contributions to building Israel. But the idea that they were the ruling elite is more racist nonsense from Joy Reid.
Reid's "lower castes" actually ran Israel.
But while Roseanne's comments were enough to get her fired and her show canceled, no amount of vile posts from Joy Reid will get MSNBC to dump her. Because there's a double standard here.

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *