A BATTLE-hardened Swedish war correspondent says she fears for her country as her home city of Stockholm continues to be plagued by violence. http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/776560/Sweden-Riots-European-Migrant-Crisis-Rape-War-Iraq
Filed under: Government, Immigration, Islam, Uncategorized | Tagged: Safety, Sweden | 1 Comment »
In Switzerland it has long been customary for students to shake the hands of their teachers at the beginning and end of the school day. It’s a sign of solidarity and mutual respect between teacher and pupil, one that is thought to encourage the right classroom atmosphere. Justice Minister Simonetta Sommaruga recently felt compelled to further explain that shaking hands was part of Swiss culture and daily life.
And the reason she felt compelled to speak out about the handshake is that two Muslim brothers, aged 14 and 15, who have lived in Switzerland for several years (and thus are familiar with its mores), in the town of Therwil, near Basel, refused to shake the hands of their teacher, a woman, because, they claimed, this would violate Muslim teachings that contact with the opposite sex is allowed only with family members.
At first the school authorities decided to avoid trouble, and initially granted the boys an exemption from having to shake the hand of any female teacher. But an uproar followed, as Mayor Reto Wolf explained to the BBC: “the community was unhappy with the decision taken by the school. In our culture and in our way of communication a handshake is normal and sends out respect for the other person, and this has to be brought home to the children in school.”
Therwil’s Educational Department reversed the school’s decision, explaining in a statement on May 25 that the school’s exemption was lifted because “the public interest with respect to equality between men and women and the integration of foreigners significantly outweighs the freedom of religion.” It added that a teacher has the right to demand a handshake. Furthermore, if the students refused to shake hands again “the sanctions called for by law will be applied,” which included a possible fine of up to 5,000 dollars.
This uproar in Switzerland, where many people were enraged at the original exemption granted to the Muslim boys, did not end after that exemption was itself overturned by the local Educational Department. The Swiss understood quite clearly that this was more than a little quarrel over handshakes; it was a fight over whether the Swiss would be masters in their own house, or whether they would be forced to yield, by the granting of special treatment, to the Islamic view of the proper relations between the sexes. It is one battle – small but to the Swiss significant – between overweening Muslim immigrants and the indigenous Swiss.
Naturally, once the exemption was withdrawn, all hell broke loose among Muslims in Switzerland. The Islamic Central Council of Switzerland, instead of yielding quietly to the Swiss decision to uphold the handshaking custom, criticized the ruling in hysterical terms, claiming that the enforcement of the handshaking is “totalitarian” (!) because its intent is to “forbid religious people from meeting their obligations to God.”
That, of course, was never the “intent” of the long-standing handshaking custom, which was a nearly-universal custom in Switzerland, and in schools had to do only with encouraging the right classroom atmosphere of mutual respect between instructor and pupil, of which the handshake was one aspect.
The Swiss formulation of the problem – weighing competing claims — will be familiar to Americans versed in Constitutional adjudication. In this case “the public interest with respect to equality” of the sexes and the “integration of foreigners” (who are expected to adopt Swiss ways, not force the Swiss to exempt them from some of those ways) were weighed against the “religious obligations to God” of Muslims, and the former interests found to outweigh the latter.
What this case shows is that even at the smallest and seemingly inconsequential level, Muslims are challenging the laws and customs of the Infidels among whom they have been allowed to settle [i.e., stealth jihad toward sharia dominance]. Each little victory, or defeat, will determine whether Muslims will truly integrate into a Western society or, instead, refashion that society to meet Muslim requirements.
The handshake has been upheld and, what’s more, a stiff fine now will be imposed on those who continue to refuse to shake hands with a female teacher. This is a heartening sign of non-surrender by the Swiss. But the challenges of the Muslims within Europe to the laws and customs of the indigenes have no logical end and will not stop.
And the greater the number of Muslims allowed to settle in Europe, the stronger and more frequent their challenges will be. They are attempting not to integrate, but rather to create, for now, a second, parallel society, and eventually, through sheer force of numbers from both migration and by outbreeding the Infidels, to fashion not a parallel society but one society — now dominated by Muslim sharia.
The Swiss handshaking dispute has received some, but not enough, press attention. Presumably, it’s deemed too inconsequential a matter to bother with. But the Swiss know better. And so should we.
There’s an old Scottish saying that in one variant reads: “Many a little makes a mickle.” That is, the accumulation of many little things leads to one big thing. That’s what’s happening in Europe today. This was one victory for the side of sanity. There will need to be a great many more.
They won’t shake hands but they will rape them in a heart beat.
Filed under: family, Government, Islam, muslims, Uncategorized | Tagged: Culture, muslims, Stupidity, Swiss | Leave a comment »
This video is somewhat alarming, but not unusual for new immigrants coming into the country. I live in Chicago and over the past seventy years I have seen neighborhoods similar to this one in Dearborn with some exceptions. The signage was in Polish, Italian, German, and most recently Mexican. People who come into our country need to live near other people of their own nationality. Think about it, if you were suddenly dropped into an area of Iraq and had to learn the language, read the strange alphabet, assimilate into their culture how would you like it. Most likely, you would want to live in there American village with all the other Americans. Do you think the Iraqi’s would welcome you with open arms? Most likely, they would be hollering and screaming at you to get the hell out. Also not an easy thing to take. Assimilation takes time, learning a new language takes time, learning your way around the block takes time, finding food you can eat all takes an effort. None of it is easy.
What seems to be different with the Muslim immigrant is an Imam preaching not to assimilate. All of the kids I went to school with were pushed by their parents to learn the language, and to learn in school. My brother learned to speak English in grammar school. My sister and I learned from him, my parents learned from us, and from English classes for immigrants. There wasn’t a single nationality that harbored a hatred for America. Every Mexican I know is a friend. I love them as a people. They love America, they learn the language, they work hard, and they want to be your friend.
I would love to be alive a hundred years from now to see just how this new world works out.
Filed under: Immigration, Islam, muslims, Uncategorized | Tagged: Assimilation, muslims | 1 Comment »
This post is directed at all the liberal do-gooders who are sporting a tizzy fit over Trump’s directive to follow a law. What the current protests are telling me is that the country as a whole has become less American in the last 65 years. Trump’s action was directed at keeping the country safe from radical Islamist terrorism. Yet, we witness thousands of dingbats throwing fire bombs at the buildings where free speech was going to interfere with their agenda. I think after Trump has his finger on the foreign terrorist situation he should perform a “clean the swamp” action against all un-American veggie eaters who despise the country.
Today, I had audience with a Social Worker who came to comfort me in my time of need (my need as defined by hospice care). Evidently, this worker has classified me as borderline depressed. Who wouldn’t be depressed when they are watching their wife die?
Anyway, this young lady who admitted to being a Bernie supporter during the primaries indicated that she was somewhat displeased with Trump’s behavior as president. I asked her, “what action has Trump taken that has you so upset over him as president?”
Orderly, vetting and entry
“The freeze on immigrants coming into the country,” she said.
“I guess you don’t agree with his desire to keep us safe from terrorists?”
“No, it is because his order was not thought out very carefully, have you heard about the doctor from Christ hospital who went on vacation to his home country to get married that wasn’t allowed to return? Christ Hospital had to file a lawsuit to get the government to get him back.”
“I call that a good case of extreme vetting. The guy had to be from one of the seven countries from which the bad actors come. Right now, the liability is with Christ Hospital, if this guy becomes a bad actor his presence in the country will lie on Christ Hospital’s broad shoulders.”
The lady who was my counselor is not thirty years old yet which makes her a millennial with a liberal education and attitude. These kids do not understand the concept of war, nor of collateral damage. It is my aged opinion that causing a minor delay to an immigrant to return to America is a small price to pay for our safety.
Evidently, Ms Counselor, whose husband is a doctor considers all medical people to be immune from radicalism, and therefore should be exempt from come and go Visas to any radical country in the world. It is exactly that kind of thinking that the smart guys like. They figure it out and then use medical credentials as their key to the front door.
See. she did her job. She got me to unleash this rant from my depressed head and I feel better already. Read this piece below to get some education on how our ancient ancestors from the nineteen-fifties interpreted the Constitution to keep us safe from harm.
The Progressive Way To Enter a Country
############################################################
A Law for almost 65 years.
Here are the historic facts that would seem to indicate that many of the people we elect to work for us in Washington DC do NOT have the slightest idea of what laws already exist in OUR country.
After several terrorist incidents were carried out in the United States, Donald Trump was severely, criticized for suggesting that the U.S. should limit or temporarily suspend the immigration of certain ethnic groups, nationalities, and even people of certain religions (Muslims). The criticisms condemned such a suggestion as, among other things, being un-American, dumb, stupid, reckless, dangerous and racist. Congressmen and Senators swore that they would never allow such legislation, and our current President called such a prohibition on immigration “unconstitutional”.
As Gomer Pyle would say, “Well, Surprise, Surprise!” It seems that the selective immigration ban is already law and has been applied on several occasions.
Known as the McCarran-Walter Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 allows for the “Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by the President, whenever the President finds that the entry of aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States. The President may, by proclamation, and for such a period as he shall deem necessary, may suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants or impose any restrictions on the entry of aliens he may deem to be appropriate.”
And who do you suppose last utilized this process? Why it was Democrat President Jimmy Carter, no less than 37 years ago, in 1979, to keep Iranians out of the United States.
But he actually did more. He made ALL Iranian students, already in the United States, check in with the government. And then he deported a bunch of them. Seven thousand were found in violation of their visas, and a total of 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the USA in 1979.
So, what say you about all of the criticism that Donald Trump received from the Democrat Senators, Representatives and Obama?
Additionally, it is important to note that the McCarran-Walter Act also requires that an “applicant for immigration must be of good moral character and in agreement with the principles of our Constitution.”
Therefore, one could surmise that since the Quran forbids Muslims to swear allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, technically, ALL Muslims should be refused immigration to OUR country.
Authenticated at http://library.uwb.edu/ stati c/ USimmigration/1952_ immigration _and_nationality_act.html
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952<http://library.uwb.edu/static/USimmigration/1952_immigration_and_nationality_act.html>
library.uwb.edu<http://library.uwb.edu/>http://www<http://www/>. sno pes.com/islam-banned-u-s-<http://snopes.com/islam-banned-u-s-> 1952/
US immigration legislation online : 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, a.k.a. the McCarran-Walter Act (An act to revise the laws relating to immigration .
Filed under: Conservative, Government, Islam | Tagged: Extreme Vetting, Freeze, McCarran-Walter Act, Trump | 1 Comment »
Death Of the Shining City
