The Right to Wear the Hijab

The Columbia Daily Tribune is reporting that Youssif Omar was arrested after dragging a female relative out of a Missouri classroom. The man grabbed the girl by her hair and dragged her down a flight of stairs to the parking lot.

Youssif Z. Omar was at the school and noticed a 14-year-old female family member was not wearing a hijab, a traditional headscarf that some Muslim women wear. Omar became irate, Stroer said, grabbed the girl “very violently by the hair” and pulled her outside and down a flight of stairs.

Omar allegedly slapped the girl’s face and pulled her into his car by her hair, [Officer] Stroer said. Police arrested Omar on suspicion of child abuse, a felony, at 5:10 p.m. Wednesday at his residence . . ..  He was released from the Boone County Jail after posting a $4,500 bond.

. . .which seems a little low for a violent felony, but what do I know.

I was reminded of our President’s First Apology Tour, and the speech he gave at al-Azhar Universary in Cairo in 2009, bragging that

the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.

Further blather followed, about how the whole world must work to insure equality, but Mr. Obama’s primary concern was that women should be free to prematurely don their shrouds if they want to. Apparently the message was received in Missouri.


The Pig in the White House

On Wednesday and continuing today, Mr Obama attacked Republicans for disagreeing with his plan to flood the United States with Muslim migrants, and largely did so by trying to feminize those who disagree with him.

First the old canard that irrationality is somehow tied to the uterus: “We don’t make good decisions if it’s based on hysteria . . .” This was soon followed by snide suggestions that Republicans are afraid of “widows and orphans,” and specifically, 3-year-old orphans.

Just for the sake of argument, I doubt that the rape rate in Sweden has risen by 1472% because of 3-year-old perpetrators, whether their parents are living or not. But maybe Obwana somehow got confused and is thinking of the victims of Muslims.  Some 3-year-olds in that company, alas.

And think of a few of the more famous widows:

Jackie Kennedy, Coretta Scott King, Mary Todd Lincoln, Joan Rivers, Nancy Reagan. Contemptibly helpless, eh? No criminals in that number as far as we know, but one of them managed to tick off Onana to the point where she died in mysterious circumstances a few days later.

Just sayin’.

So wrong again, Mr. President.

Obama was telling us all about how the “JV” team “ISIL” was contained, and hours later came the deadly ISIS attacks on Paris. (Here’s my theory about why only Obama –and a very few of his lick-spittle sycophants in the media and in his own administration — says “ISIL”: He’s afraid to utter the name of the Goddess. As a Muslim, he feels “unsafe” even pronouncing the name of a powerful female deity, especially one worshipped in Egypt, where Obama’s dear friend Morsi languishes in prison.)

Why would anyone in their right mind take Obama’s word for anything, and particularly anything to do with world affairs or the security of the United States? After all,  he’s a crap golfer too, and that –unlike the safety of Americans — is something he really cares about.

He’s not only wrong, he’s positively malevolent. He is determined to destroy this country, and he’s running out of time. So HURRY! and flood the country with as many Muslims as possible so we can continue the destruction before it’s too late. And never mind that he has no legal authority to do so.

Obama even has the, yes, audacity to tell us that a “religious test” for refugees is un-American (I guess he asked somebody.) But in Obama’s America, only Muslims make the cut, while most Christians -who are fleeing actual persecution at the hands of –you guessed it –Muslims, are sent back, and only ONE Yazidi has been admitted. Quel miracle! Exactly the way Obama would have it, if he were able to apply a “religious test.”

Stockholm Syndrome

The Foreign Minister of Sweden, the rape capital of the West, has blamed the Paris Islamic terrorist attacks on the plight of the Poor Palestinians™.

Margot Wallstrom had this to say in a televised interview:

Obviously, we have reason to be worried, not just in Sweden but across the world—because there are so many that are being radicalized. Here, once again, we are brought back to situations like the one in the Middle East, where not least, the Palestinians see that there is not a future. We must either accept a desperate situation or resort to violence.

The Stockholm Syndrome is alive and well in the rape capital of the West. Poor Margot clearly identifies with the Islamist murderers of innocent strangers out for an evening in the City of Light. It seems reasonable to her to believe that the Palestinians will only have a future  if other Muslims can kill enough soccer fans and concert goers in the French capital, though the mechanism behind this theory remains obscure.

Meanwhile, the Palestinians have blamed the attack on Mossad.

Lying Like A Palestinian

The Palestinian Authority (PA) today blamed The ISIS terrorist attacks in Paris on Mossad.

Meanwhile back in the world of reason, France launched airstrikes against the ISIS stronghold  of Raqqa. The strikes delivered twenty bombs to two targets in northern Syria,  according to a French defense official. The bombs targeted a command center,  the official said. The ten aircraft flew from Jordan and the UAE.

Too Little, Too Late as the Rape Jihad Continues

On Thursday, Sweden reimposed border controls for the first time in 20 years. They began checking trains entering the country south of Malmo, the first station after leaving Denmark, and now a Muslim enclave. But migrants are only turned away if they are traveling through Sweden on their way elsewhere. Those wishing to  apply  for  asylum  in  Sweden are taken by bus to . . . Malmo.

In the wake of the massive influx of migrants seeking asylum in Europe, the incidence of rape has risen proportionately. That is, in proportion to the number of Muslim migrants admitted.  In the words of British polical activist Anne-Marie Waters, “It’s true, women are abused everywhere, but in most countries it’s against the law. In Islamic states, it is the law.” 

Sweden,  the rape capital of Europe, has held on to its title, but France, and especially Germany, are gaining ground. Which is to say, losing ground, if the intention is to have a civilization. And a civilization where the women and children don’t need an armed escort to go to school or work or the grocery store, or just outside to look at the stars.

Sweden’s rape rate has increased by 1472% (yes, that is the correct number)  since Sweden’s parliament decided in 1975 to welcome immigrants in an effort to become a multicultural society. As published by the Gatestone Institute

Sweden is now number two on the global list of rape countries. According to a survey from 2010, Sweden, with 53.2 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants, is surpassed only by tiny Lesotho in Southern Africa, with 91.6 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants.

The explosion in the Swedish rape rate coincides with the influx of Muslim immigrants from Iraq, Syria and Somalia, but it is difficult to establish  direct causation since registration specifying religion or ancestry is illegal, and 2nd generation immigrants are considered Swedes.

The UK has also proved a pioneer of the spiraling rape rate, coupled with a reluctance on the part of the police to identify what is happening, and who is responsible. In an almost unbelievable dereliction of duty, the police of Rotherham kept their mouths shut about organized rape gangs preying on an estimated 1400 adolescent girls. Why risk being called a racist, when instead you can let the country’s children be repeatedly raped, gang-raped, beaten and abused, for years and years, by “Asian” immigrants?

But Angela Merkel’s Germany is refusing to be outdone. By Mid-August there were already reports of a “rape culture” prevailing in refugee camps, with women and children regularly subject to sexual assault by their fellow asylum seekers. Women feared walking around in the camps even during the day. German women’s groups described a situation where women were obliged to sleep in their street clothes, and avoided using toilet facilities at night.  Rapes, sexual assaults and forced prostitution had been reported, and police were reluctant to act, claiming a lack of evidence.

By now it has become a commonplace for the so-called refugees– an estimated 70 – 80% of whom are young men– to prey on the women of their host countries.

In a particularly telling story which seems emblematic of the problem, a “No Borders” activist was gang-raped  when working with refugees on the French-Italian border. She did not report the crime for over a month, and says she was pressured to remain silent by other immigration activists lest she damage the cause.

And today there is the sad report of women being assaulted at a “Refugees Welcome” party given  in Bonn by a  pro-migrant aid society .  Apparently some of the men repaid their German advocates by molesting the women in attendance, refusing to leave, and refusing to stop the behavior. The sponsoring group is truly sorry.

Now About That Racism Charge . . .

In a new NBC / WSJ poll, Dr. Ben Carson leads the field for the Republican presidential nomination.

Oh come on, that can’t be right. Didn’t they notice that he’s an African-American? And as we have been told over and over and over again over the last eight years, Republicans just can’t handle a black man in the White House. The tea party is racist. The Republican party is racist.

Some Democrats have gone so far as to insist that Lincoln was a Democrat –though even a rudimentary familiarity with American history proves otherwise –because surely he couldn’t have been a Republican.

So how to explain Dr. Carson? Its almost as if Republicans have no problem with race.

Maybe their detestation of Obama has more to do with his policies –or lack thereof, in the case of a coherent foreign policy –and character. Maybe they don’t like him because he lies like breathing, breaks his promises, won’t come clean about his past, blames everything on somebody else, slanders those who oppose him,  breaks the law, rules like a dictator, and has generally tried to drive this country into the ground.

Republican support for Dr. Carson has something to do with his integrity, his undeniable accomplishments, the fact that he –unlike the current president –may actually be the smartest guy in the room.

And then there is the admiration that anyone would feel for Dr. Carson’s patient forbearance with the “gotcha” media and their faux-naif misconstrual of his gun ownership comments. So he’s also cool under fire.

Or maybe it’s just that the current Democrat “looks-like-America” candidate roster consists of a 60-something white woman and a 70-something white man. Take your pick.