PA parliament leader praises terrorist as ‘martyr of Allah’ Deputy Speaker of the Palestinian Authority Parliament praises terror attack that killed 2 Israelis, calls for Arabs to follow in footsteps.
Ahmad Bahar, Deputy Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, called on the Arab inhabitants of East Jerusalem to follow in the footsteps of the terrorist who murdered two people at Ammunition Hill on Sunday, one a newly-married police officer and the other a 60-year-old grandmother.
Bahar, a senior member of the Hamas terrorist organization, called the family of the terrorist and blessed them for their father’s “martyrdom in the way of Allah.”
He described the terrorist attack as one of the most “significant actions” since the start of the so-called ‘al Quds intifada” one year ago.
Terrorist opens fire in Jerusalem, killing two Police officer and bystander succumb to injuries after attack near capital’s Ammunition Hill, five others injured; assailant killed in shootout with cops
Two people were killed and five more were injured in a shooting attack near Ammunition Hill in Jerusalem Sunday morning, police and emergency medical officials said.
Police described the incident, which saw an East Jerusalem gunman open fire at pedestrians and police over a several hundred meter swath of the capital, as a terror attack.
One woman, approximately 60 years old, was shot in the upper body and critically wounded in the attack, according to the Magen David Adom ambulance service.
A police officer, approximately 30 years old, was also critically wounded in a shootout with the assailant, police said.
Both were later declared dead, after being rushed to Hadassah Hospital Mount Scopus, a spokesperson said.
Three other victims, including a 68-year-old man, were moderately wounded, while another two were lightly injured in the attack, according to MDA.
The attacker was shot and killed. He was identified as a 39-year-old resident of Silwan, in East Jerusalem, police said.
He possessed an Israeli identification card, according to Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan.
“There were no prior warnings ahead of a focused attack like this,” Erdan said.
The attack began as the assailant drove by police headquarters on Haim Bar-Lev Street, a main artery also served by the city’s light rail, and opened fire at a group of people, hitting one woman, police said.
He sped off toward Charles Simon Clermont-Ganneau Street and shot a woman who was in her car, critically wounding her.
He continued toward the Arab neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah. Police officers on motorcycles from the city’s Special Patrol Unit saw the shooting and gave chase, police said.
The assailant then opened fire at the officers, who shot and “neutralized him,” police said.
During the shootout, one officer was critically wounded, while a second was lightly to moderately injured, police said.
A video that was released on social media (below) appeared to show the shootout between police officers and the terrorist.
The second injured officer, 28, was taken to the capital’s Hadassah Hospital Ein Kerem, the hospital said.
One of the moderately wounded victims, a 50-year-old woman, was taken to Hadassah Hospital Mount Scopus. The three other victims were taken to Jerusalem’s Shaare Zedek Medical Center, according to MDA.
Two of the victims taken to Shaare Zedek were not injured by gunfire, but sustained light injuries when the terrorist’s vehicle collided with their car, MDA said.
Three people were also treated on the scene and later brought to the hospital after they suffered anxiety attacks, MDA said.
Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat, who had been on a tour of the West Bank at the time of the shooting, rushed back to the capital to visit the scene of the attack, as did Erdan and Israel Police Chief Roni Alsheich.
Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan speaks with Jerusalem Police chief Yoram Halevy at the scene of a terror attack near Ammunition Hill in Jerusalem on October 9, 2016. (Courtesy)
The Hamas terrorist organization praised the shooting, calling it “heroic”, “brave” and a “natural response to the occupation,” Army Radio reported.
At the start of the weekly cabinet meeting, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sent well-wishes to the Israelis injured in the shooting attack.
The prime minister praised the security forces involved, who he said acted “very quickly and with determination” and “hunted down the terrorist and killed him.”
After the attack, police asked for and received a gag order on the details of the investigation of the shooting, a spokesperson said.
Hadassah opened a dedicated hotline for information about the victims. People in Israel can dial 1255121.
The attack broke a spell of calm in the capital that followed a months-long wave of violence last autumn and winter that included several attacks near Ammunition Hill.
Officials had feared a return to stabbing, shooting and car-ramming attacks with the onset of the fall holiday season, when religious tensions often spike.
October 2015 marked the start of several months of near-daily attacks during which at least 34 Israelis and over 200 Palestinians were killed in a spate of attacks. Most of the Palestinians killed were attackers or involved in clashes with troops.
IDF hits targets in northern Gaza in response to rocket strike After projectile lands on a Sderot street, Israeli tanks reportedly fire on Hamas sites in Beit Hanoun
A rocket launched from the Gaza Strip strikes a road in the southern city of Sderot on October 5, 2016. (Israel Police)
Israeli tanks fired on Hamas targets in the northern Gaza Strip on Wednesday in response to a rocket that landed in southern Israel earlier in the day, the army said.
According to Palestinian reports, the IDF tanks struck sites in Beit Hanoun, on the northeastern corner of the coastal enclave. The army would not immediately confirm those reports to The Times of Israel.
There were no immediate reports of Palestinian injuries.
The rocket, which had been fired from the Gaza Strip, struck a street in the city of Sderot — a few miles from Beit Hanoun — just before 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday, police said, causing damage and sending three people to the hospital suffering from anxiety attacks.
The Islamic State-affiliated Ahfad al-Sahaba-Aknaf Bayt al-Maqdis terrorist group took responsibility for the rocket launch in statements released in both Arabic and Hebrew.
“Oh you cowardly Jews: You don’t have safety in our land. [Former defense minister Moshe] Ya’alon, the failure at giving security. [Defense Minister Avigdor] Liberman to fail will be a certainty,” the Salafist group said in its statement, in poorly translated Hebrew.
The attack against Israel was apparently a response to the Strip’s Hamas rulers arresting several members of the Salafist organization, according to the group’s statement.
Though the Salafist group took responsibility for the attack, Israel has said it holds Hamas responsible for any attacks emanating from Gaza and routinely responds to such launches with strikes inside the Palestinian territory.
“We can’t go after every little group in Gaza with a couple of dozen members that goes out one night and fires a rocket,” a senior officer in the IDF’s Southern Command told reporters last month.
Ahfad al-Sahaba-Aknaf Bayt al-Maqdis released a similar statement last month, after a failed attempt to launch a rocket at southern Israel on the first day of school. The group also claimed responsibility for a rocket attack that hit Sderot in August, landing between two houses in the southern Israeli city.
In Wednesday morning’s rocket attack, three people in Sderot “suffered anxiety attacks” and were treated by medical teams, but no one was physically hurt by the attack, according to the Magen David Adom medical service.
The three — including a 15-year-old girl and 60-year-old man — were taken to Ashkelon’s Barzilai Medical Center for further care, MDA paramedics said.
The rocket alert siren was activated at approximately 10:20 a.m. and was heard in Sderot, Nir Am, Ivim and Gevim.
A few minutes later, Israel Police officers located the rocket in Sderot. The street where it landed was damaged in the attack, as were several nearby cars and homes.
Police sappers were called to the scene, and the area was closed off to pedestrians and traffic, police said.
Police sappers dig out piece of a rocket launched from the Gaza Strip that struck a road in the southern city of Sderot on October 5, 2016.
Last month, a mortar shell was launched from the Gaza Strip and landed in a field in southern Israel, causing neither injury nor damage, the army said. The projectile hit an empty field in the Eshkol region, next to the southern Strip, according to a statement from the Israel Defense Forces.
A battery of Russian S-300 air defense missile launchers has been transported to Syria, Russia’s Defense Ministry said in a statement. Its sole purpose is to defend a Russian naval base and warships, the ministry added.
The information about the S-300’s deployment was confirmed by ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov.
“Indeed, the Syrian Arab Republic received an S-300 anti-aircraft missile system. This system is designed to ensure the safety of the naval base in [Syrian city of] Tartus and ships located in the coastal area [in Syria]…” he told the media.
Konashenkov said it is unclear why the deployment of the missile system has created such a fuss in the West.
“The S-300 is a purely defensive system and poses no threat,” he said.
He recalled that before the deployment of S-300, Russia had delivered Fort air defense missile systems to Syria.
The statement comes after a report by Fox news that a Russian S-300 was deployed to Syria. The media cited three US officials who claimed that Moscow “continues to ramp up its military operations in Syria.”
In November 2015, Moscow deployed its newest S-400 air defense missile system to Khmeimim in Syria as part of a security boost following the downing of a Russian jet by Turkey near the border with that country. At the time, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the S-400 systems are not targeting Russia’s partners, “with whom we fight terrorists in Syria together.”
The S-400 is the most advanced anti-aircraft defense system in Russia.
(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)
The first presidential “debate” was a farce. The next presidential “debates” will likely be as well. Rather than submit to biased mainstream media moderators (but I repeat myself), Trump should propose real debates, in addition to or as substitutes for those currently scheduled. The article is also a bit of a rant about Ms. Clinton.
In a real debate, one resolution is proposed. The candidate in favor of the proposition speaks first and gets a specified amount of time to say why it’s a good idea. Then the candidate against the proposition gets a specified amount of time for rebuttal and the other candidate a specified amount of time to respond. A timekeeper would alert the candidates when time is almost up and then up. There would be no moderator to help one debater and to trash the other; the debaters would be on their own. Both would know the issue in advance and could prepare to address it however they please and with or without prepared notes. Were our presidential debates so conducted, viewers might well learn about the candidates’ positions on the issues by how the candidates address them, rather than via the moderator.
Here are a few possible debate propositions, for illustrative purposes only:
that no other region in the world is “more important” for the prosperity and security of the United States than Latin America.
“There is power in our proximity, which means we are not only close geographically but also in our values, interests and in our common cultural heritage,” Clinton said, adding that the “interdependence” of the economies of the two regions, as well as the ties between communities and families, is a tremendous advantage.
“We shouldn’t build a wall between us because of that truth, but rather accept it,” she said, a clear reference to her rival, Republican candidate Donald Trump, who has promised more than once to build a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico if elected to the White House.
Ms. Clinton has disagreed with Trump’s assertion that “No one has the right to immigrate to this country.”
A real debate grounded on the following resolution would deal with the matter raised by Ms. Clinton. Hillary could take the affirmative and Trump the negative:
Resolved: no other region in the world is more important for the prosperity and security of the United States than Latin America.
There is power in our proximity, which means we are not only close geographically but also in our values, interests and in our common cultural heritage. The interdependence of the economies of the two regions, as well as the ties between communities and families, is a tremendous advantage.
We shouldn’t build a wall between us because of that truth, but rather accept it. The wall along our southern border would keep our the good immigrants we need and there is a right to immigrate to America.
Trump would probably point out that his wall would prevent not even one legal immigrant from coming to the United States. He might also suggest that were our immigration laws and procedures more rational (like those of Mexico?) and reflected American interests as well as those of the immigrants, it would be much easier for the immigrants we want to come, legally: those who haven’t committed significant law violations, can soon become self-supporting instead of relying on welfare, do not have serious contagious diseases and appear likely to accept American values rather than, for example, joining gangs and/or importing drugs. Trump could easily provide legal support for the proposition that there is, in fact, no legal right to immigrate to America.
Islam, the religion of peace, tolerance and women’s rights
There has been substantial discussion in the few media outlets providing an “honest discussion” of Islam about the extent to which Hillary and her colleague Huma Abedin have similar views on Sharia law. Under a Clinton presidency, Huma would likely have a high place at the White House, if not as Secretary of State.
Even if Huma were to state that she disagrees with her father, mother and other close relatives about Islam and Sharia law, would she tell the truth or engage in Al-taqiyya (lying to non-Muslims to advance Islamist doctrine)?
worked on an Islamist journal for 12 years, beginning the year she became a White House intern. She hasn’t commented on that job.
. . . .
In 2012, Rep. Michele Bachmann and four other members of Congress requested information about the influence of Muslim Brotherhood-tied groups and individuals in the U.S. government, including Abedin, who worked for 12 years as an assistant editor of an Islamist journal that spewed extremism.
Abedin’s tenure at the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs began in 1996, the year she began working as an intern at the White house.
While it is certainly possible to disavow the ideology of one’s parents, Abedin has remained silent on their extremism as well as her work with on journal. It remains to be seen whether or not she will repudiate these new findings.
. . . .
Syed Abedin, Huma Abedin’s father who died in 1993, was a Muslim scholar connected to the Saudi Arabian government. According to exclusive video footage from 1971 recently obtained by the Washington Free Beacon, Syed Abedin advocated the following:
As Muslim countries evolve, he said, “The state has to take over. The state is stepping in in many countries … where the state is now overseeing that human relationships are carried on on the basis of Islam. The state also under Islam has a right to interfere in some of these rights given to the individual by the sharia.”
In addition, he is quoted as saying, “The main dynamics of life in the Islamic world are still supplied by Islam. Any institution, as I said before, any concept, any idea, in order to be accepted and become a viable thing in the Islamic world has to come through … Islam.”
Abedin’s mother, Saleha, has an especially strong Islamist ties. She is a member of the female counterpart of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Muslim World League. She leads a group called the International Islamic Committee for Women and Child, a subsidiary of a Muslim Brotherhood-led group that is banned in Israel for its links to Hamas.
In 1999 and three years after Huma began working for the journal, the journal and Saleha Abedin’s group published a book in Arabic titled “Women in Islam: A Discourse in Rights and Obligations.”
The book states that man-made law is inherently oppressive towards women, while sharia law is liberating. According to the text, Muslim women have an obligation to contribute to jihad, apostates are to be put to death, adulterers should be stoned or lashed, freedom of speech should be conformed to the boundaries set by sharia and wives must have sex with their husbands on command, “even if she is not in the mood.“
In addition, the organization led by Huma Abedin’s mother “advocates for the repeal of Mubarak-era prohibitions on female genital mutilation, child marriage and marital rape, on the grounds that such prohibitions run counter to Islamic law, which allows for their practice,” according to an analysis by the Center for Security policy.
The book advocates against laws to assure equality of women, saying, “Man-made laws have in fact enslaved women, submitting them to the cupidity and caprice of human beings. Islam is the only solution and the only escape.”
In terms of women working in high positions, the book states, “Her job would involve long hours of free mixing and social interaction with the opposite sex, which is forbidden in Islam. Moreover, women’s biological constitution is different from that of men. Women are fragile, emotional and sometimes unable to handle difficult and strenuous situations. Men are less emotional and show more perseverance.”
Honor killings of their own maimed and maltreated women. Forced conversions and kidnappings and abductions of whole school-loads of girls and women. Selling these captives on the open market as slaves for the slugs who then abuse the women and girls unto death. Not to mention torture as a rule, not exception, for captured women. Nor, of course, the overall banning of women from driving, traveling alone, working outside the home, or suing for their own lives, domestic arrangements, or unheard-of gay right to not have a male husband/overlord.
For all these, the “Ms. Piggy”- quoting smartest woman in the world has done and said…nothing.
What do Muslims worldwide believe?
How about,
Resolved: America is not merely a Judeo-Christian nation and Islam is no less peaceful and tolerant than Christiany and Judaism. To become more diverse, we need more Muslim refugees and should strive to accommodate them by making our laws less offensive.
Hillary could take the affirmative and Trump the negative.
Conclusions
Trump should offer Ms. Clinton an opportunity to provide additional resolutions for debate which he might support.
Were Trump to propose supplemental or replacement debates along these lines, Hillary would very likely reject his offer because she needs support from the moderators and would understand the dangers a real debate would present. If Ms. Clinton declines Trump’s offer, he should feel free to decide whether to participate in the partisan “debate” farce as currently established.
Moscow has accused Washington of sabotaging the Syria ceasefire deal, saying that the US will be responsible for any new terror attacks in Syria, as by taking no action against Al-Nusra terrorists it shows it is ready “to make a deal with the devil.”
Washington “has never exerted any real pressure on Jabhat Al-Nusra, done nothing for delineation to succeed and taken no action against its militants,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement Monday, following the US decision to suspend cooperation on Syria.
Besides failing to deliver on its part of the deal, the US were hampering Moscow’s efforts to stop the terrorists, the Russian Foreign Ministry said, calling Washington’s decision a “reflection” of the Obama administration’s inability to meet the key condition for Russia-US cooperation on the Syrian peace process.
The way the situation has been unraveling in Syria in the past few weeks has made Moscow doubt what Washington’s real intentions are, according to the ministry.
“We are becoming more convinced that in a pursuit of a much desired regime change in Damascus, Washington is ready to ‘make a deal with the devil’,” the Foreign Ministry said. For the sake of ousting Syrian President Bashar Assad, the US appears to be ready to “forge an alliance with hardened terrorists, dreaming of turning back the course of history.”
While Jabhat Al-Nusra, a designated terrorist organization, has been known as an Al-Qaeda affiliate for many years, Washington “is not in a hurry to separate US-oriented anti-government forces from it,” Moscow points out. On the contrary, even though Al-Nusra has never been a part of any peace deal, Washington “covers it with the shield of opposition groups which formally confirmed their participation in the cessation of hostilities.”
Meanwhile, Russia’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, who on Monday assumed the post of the President of the UN Security Council, expressed his concerns over the halt in Russia-US cooperation in Syria.
At the same time, he insisted that the current setback in Syria will not lead to another “Cold War” between Moscow and Washington.
“I think you are dramatizing the nature of our disagreements with the US,” Churkin said, replying to a reporter at a press conference, adding that there’s still a chance to revive the cooperation.
“I hope there will not be a new Cold War,” he added.
For now, the main objective in Syria for Russia is to thwart Al-Nusra’s latest offensive in Aleppo, which has seen increasing number of terrorist attacks in the wake of the ceasefire’s collapse.
“In the process of the past few weeks, after the September 9 arrangements were reached, we have seen numerous violations by Nusra and others cooperating with Nusra of the cessation of hostilities regime”, Churkin said, adding that about 1.5 million people are currently stand the risk of being besieged by its militants south of Aleppo.
“We must make sure that Nusra’s influence is not going to continue to spread,” he stressed, describing the situation in Aleppo as “extremely dramatic.”
On a broader scale, Russia’s long-term aim in the region is to “throw the terrorists out” of Iraq and Syria, as it is the only way to secure the lives of civilians, living there in constant danger from extremists.
To mitigate the impact of one of the terrorists’ most powerful weapons, propaganda, Russia has submitted a draft resolution to the UN Security Council designed “to counter terrorist ideology and the ideology of violent extremism,” Churkin said.
Meanwhile, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland is set to visit Moscow this week. However, she is expected to discuss solely Ukraine and implementation of the Minsk agreements, according to the State Department’s press release.
Six Jerusalem Arabs have been indicted for allegedly working to establish a cell of the ISIS terror organization inside Israel.
The six were charged in a Jerusalem court of security offenses, assisting an enemy in war-time, and association with a terror group.
The suspects are residents of the Shuafat and Anata neighborhoods.
According to the indictment, from 2015 until August 2016, the suspects made efforts to enlist in ISIS and establish an ISIS cell inside Israel. Among other activities, the six organized study sessions to spread the terror group’s radical ideology.
The indictment also revealed that some of the suspects attempted to travel to Syria to join the jihadist organization’s fight against the Assad regime.
The suspects also reportedly planned terror attacks against Jews in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.
If the US launches a military campaign to oust the Syrian government, it would further fracture the country and have tremendous negative long-term consequence for the entire region, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova warned.
“If the US launches a direct aggression against Damascus and the Syrian Army, it would cause a terrible, tectonic shift not only in the country, but in the entire region,” Maria Zakharova said during a talk show, which is to be aired fully later on Saturday and has been cited by RIA.
With no government in Damascus, there will be a power vacuum in Syria, which “so-called moderates, who are, in reality, not moderate at all but just terrorists of all flavors, would fill; and there will be no dealing with them,” the diplomat predicted.
“And later it would be aggravated the way it happened in Iraq. We know that [Saddam Hussein’s] Iraqi Army became the basis of the Islamic State. Everything that both the [US-led] coalition and Russia are fighting now stems from it,” Zakharova said.
Russia and the US are accusing each other over the collapse of the ceasefire which was signed last month, but has failed. The US says Moscow did not do enough to win the trust of rebel forces and to prevent the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad from attacking his opponents. Russia says Washington was incapable of separating ‘moderate rebels’ from terrorist groups and keeping them in check for the truce to take hold.
With the collapse of the deal, the Syrian government launched an offensive on rebel-held areas of Aleppo, a city divided between the Syrian Army and dozens of armed groups, including Al Qaeda off-shoot Al-Nusra Front.
US admits not targeting Nusra, blames Moscow for own failure to separate ‘moderates’ from terroristshttps://t.co/r4pklmGcUk
The US acknowledged that it had not been going after Al-Nusra Front for months because the terrorists intermingled with ‘moderates’ and the civilian population. At the same time, it accused Moscow and Damascus of war crimes, citing civilian deaths caused by the renewed hostilities in Aleppo.
Russia has voiced concern that the US was deliberately shielding Al-Nusra Front from military action by Russia and Syria, hoping that the terrorist group would help oust the Syrian government.
For years those of us who have dared to note how Islamic jihadis invoke the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and make recruits among peaceful Muslims have been accused of “racism.” This Big Lie has been repeated so often and so insistently, without any breaking of ranks among the bought-and-paid-for mainstream media, that it has become commonplace. In response, I have repeated more times than I could possibly recall: “What race is the jihad mass murder of innocent civilians again? I keep forgetting.” I’ve pointed out almost as often that Muslims who believe that their god is commanding them to wage war against and subjugate those who don’t believe as they do come in all races, and that race has nothing to do with their imperatives.
These simple truths have not stopped the charges of “racism,” of course, because those charges have Soros millions behind them, and a seemingly endless supply of well-paid Leftist and Islamic supremacist operatives eager to repeat them. But apparently the patent falsehood of the charge has caused some concern to this propagandist cabal, because now the Obama White House is attempting to give the propaganda a better footing by declaring a new race: “Middle Eastern and North African.”
It’s not a perfect designation, because it would include Middle Eastern and North African Christians and other non-Muslims, and would exclude Muslims who aren’t Middle Eastern and North African, but the principal beneficiary would be Muslim Arabs, and that is obviously the objective. This new designation would allow the incoming Clinton administration, among other things, to enforce “the Voting Rights Act and drawing congressional and state legislative district boundaries,” i.e., gerrymander districts to exaggerate Muslim voting power; establish “federal affirmative action plans and evaluating claims of employment discrimination in employment in the private sector,” i.e., continue and expand Obama administration efforts to establish special preferences and accommodations for Muslims in the workplace; and help “minority-owned small businesses get federal grants and loans,” i.e., make sure that Muslim-owned businesses get a healthy slice of the federal taxpayer pie.
Those special privileges are, ultimately, what this is all about, as well as to bolster the spurious charge of “racism” leveled against those who oppose jihad terror and Sharia supremacism.
“White House wants to add new racial category,” by Gregory Korte, USA Today, October 1, 2016:
WASHINGTON — The White House is putting forward a proposal to add a new racial category for people from the Middle East and North Africa under what would be the biggest realignment of federal racial definitions in decades.
If approved, the new designation could appear on census forms in 2020 and could have far-reaching implications for racial identity, anti-discrimination laws and health research.
Under current law, people from the Middle East are considered white, the legacy of century-old court rulings in which Syrian Americans argued that they should not be considered Asian — because that designation would deny them citizenship under the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act. But scholars and community leaders say more and more people with their roots in the Middle East find themselves caught between white, black and Asian classifications that don’t fully reflect their identities.
“What it does is it helps these communities feel less invisible,” said Helen Samhan of the Arab American Institute, which has been advocating the change for more than 30 years. “It’s a good step, a positive step.”
On Friday, the White House Office of Management and Budget advanced the proposal with a notice in the Federal Register, seeking comments on whether to add Middle Eastern and North African as a separate racial or ethnic category, which groups would be included, and what it should be called.
Under the proposal, the new Middle East and North African designation — or MENA, as it’s called by population scholars — is broader in concept than Arab (an ethnicity) or Muslim (a religion). It would include anyone from a region of the world stretching from Morocco to Iran, and including Syrian and Coptic Christians, Israeli Jews and other religious minorities.
But the Census Bureau, which has been quietly studying the issue for two years, also has gotten caught up in debates about some groups — such as Turkish, Sudanese and Somali Americans — who aren’t included in that category. Those are issues the White House is trying to resolve before adding the box on 2020 census forms.
Adding a box on the census form could have implications beyond racial identity. According to the White House notice, the new data could be used for a wide range of political and policy purposes, including:
• Enforcing the Voting Rights Act and drawing congressional and state legislative district boundaries;
• Establishing federal affirmative action plans and evaluating claims of employment discrimination in employment in the private sector;
• Monitoring discrimination in housing, mortgage lending and credit;
• Enforcing school desegregation policies; and
• Helping minority-owned small businesses get federal grants and loans.
Adding the classification also would help the government and independent scholars understand more about trends in health, employment and education.
“We can’t even ask questions like that, because we don’t have the data,” said Germine Awad, an Egyptian-American and professor of educational psychology at the University of Texas at Austin….
Update: This insane motion was passed by a massive majority!
Vote, the motion-Marcouch / Sjoerdsma (29 614, no. 46).
Chairman: I note that, the present members of the factions of the SP, the PvdD, the PvdA, GroenLinks, D66, Van Vliet, 50PLUS, Small Group Kuzu / Öztürk, Stonemasons, the VVD, the Christian Union, the CDA for this motion voted and present members of the other groups on it, so that it is adopted.
Marcouch, the Labour MP has filed a motion with Sjoerdsma (D66) which calls for a special legal protection of Islam. At least, of ‘religion’, and this is because there would be ‘Muslim discrimination. “The word” religion “therefore falls, but not pathetic Jehovah witnesses or pathetic Calvinists need to be protected, because that’s not the background of the motion .
What then is the problem? There is nothing to worry about.
There would be ‘under reporting of these’ Muslim discrimination. “On that, a report. It is thus made no declaration, there would be discrimination. Oh dude? What ‘discrimination’ then? Here, of course, remains vague. Also, one ‘under-reporting’ not set against the other, namely because it concerns only the so-called science. Under reporting measure specifically is like measuring the black money circuit: It’s a wild guess.
Oh, there will really ever be drawn to a headscarf. And that’s not nice of course. But how many Dutch women are not abused for whore because they wear a skirt and why the PvdA and D66 should there be no motion because women it out of their head to report about it? It has become ‘normal’?
That the Muslims is correct even easier to report, so that the Dutch government is actively working to incite Muslims to declarations evident from the mass of by the supercharged declarations against Wilders, who now lead to his trial.
There is rather a report about Muslim whining than under reporting.
An older woman who wants to report it because she was robbed by a woman with a headscarf, was literally discouraged by the police to report it. Fact! Then you put it in your head to go to the police when you are being robbed by Muslims as the Netherlands.
But on no Marcouch and Sjoerdsma worry. Therefore, they are not even a motion stating that the police reports must take seriously. All returns! That would be perceived problem with the Muslim discrimination also emerge not? Well, that does not come up, because that does not exist to that extent.
And what has that to do any pulling on headscarves with the protection of religious freedom? It is generally breaking behavior, like cussing for whore. That must be addressed, but you D66 and PvdA do not hear about.
No, Islam, which is pathetic in this country. Islam, which, incidentally, not supposed to be in the Netherlands because the values of the Muslim ideology do not match the values in this country, should the PvdA and D66 given special legal protection that Muslims have priority do when declaration their whining.
Crazy. And perilous. Our living space is increasingly limited. Everything is called racism. Everywhere is punishment. Ie: For Dutch.
And now strengthen so that those sneaky motion to increase the space of Islam with the excuse of a report that has nothing to do with it.
I did not invent all this. This is the motion:
MOTION OF MEMBERS AND Marcouch Sjoerdsma
Presented May 25, 2016
The Chamber, a debate heard, whereas freedom of religious expression is under pressure; Whereas it is established in recent research that in the Rotterdam area are more than twice as many cases of discrimination than Muslims are reported to the designated authorities; whereas under reporting of Muslim discrimination elsewhere is a common phenomenon; believes that protection of freedom of religion by the government should be supported; asks the government for the upcoming budget discussions to bring forward proposals to protect religious freedom, defend and propagate, and proceeds to the order of the day. Marcouch Sjoerdsma
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments