Tuesday, November 20, 2018

Socialist-Democrats Allow Islamist Hijabs In Da House

Omar swore oath by a fucking-giant- koran.
House Lifts 181-Year-Old Ban for Ilhan Omar: The House of Representatives just lifted a 181-year-old ban against wearing hats on the floor of the House. The ban was instituted in 1837 as a pushback against the British custom to wear hats in parliament.

That tradition will now be changed to allow newly-elected Somiali-Muslim congresswoman Ilhan Omar to wear a hijab when she assumes office as the Democratic representative from Minnesota and appears on the floor of Congress. Sources in the Democratic party confirmed the ban will also be lifted to allow others with religious or medical considerations to wear headgear on the floor of the House.

Commenting on the new policy, Omar said, “There are those kinds of policies that oftentimes get created because people who have blind spots are in positions of influence and positions of power. I think it will be really exciting to see the stuff that we notice within the rules that don’t work for a modern-day America.”

Omar is correct in pointing to the lack of flexibility in rules – especially those made for arbitrary (or in this case contrary) purposes. Take the case of Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, who has been undergoing chemotherapy since last September and has lost her hair. To exercise her right to vote and fulfill her duties as an elected representative, Coleman was forced to remove her hat, exposing her bald head on the floor of Congress.

Although Watson Coleman says she got used to it, the rule should have been changed long ago to accommodate circumstances clearly outside the intent of the law. Omar said she is excited to see “the stuff within the rules that don’t work for a modern-day America” — and presumably change them.

However, she is wrong to call for a change in rules just because they don’t work for “modern-day America.” In terms of this rule, there is a much more compelling reason to change it: The hat ban literally infringes on the Constitution itself, namely the seminal right laid down in the First Amendment that guarantees the free exercise of religion to all citizens.

Barring our elected representatives from exercising this basic right is illegal, not to mention hugely hypocritical. Let’s not forget (as if we could) – the United States is not France. Our concept of religious freedom is not laïcité, which (ironically) elevates secularism to the status of a religious value.

In France, religion is not just separate from the state but for all practical purposes forbidden to be expressed by the individuals representing the state — hence, the law passed by France this year which forbids lawmakers from wearing any kind of religious symbols or clothing, or the 2004 law passed which forbids wearing of any visible religious garb (including hijabs and Jewish skull caps) in public schools.

That is a far cry from the American concept of separation of religion and state, which allows the free expression of any religion. Omar’s excitement to abolish rules that “don’t work for a modern-day America” would, by contrast, set a dangerous precedent, making Congress and other governmental institutions subject to the whims of whatever dogma is deemed politically correct at the time and by the ruling party.

By contrast, the Constitution gives us absolute values with which to legislate laws and set down rules. The real question is, why did it take until now for Congress to change this illegal rule that was based on (let’s be honest) not much more than the cultural equivalent of a rebellious teenager trying to assert his independence from his parents?

Certainly orthodox Jews serving or working in Congress previously faced the uncomfortable dilemma of having to take off their head covering while on the floor of the House (which would not be a forbidden act) or not be present. This is not even to mention the uncomfortable position the ban put Watson Coleman in.

Perhaps no one ever asked that the rule be changed until now. Perhaps it took a Muslim woman who wears a hijab to push the issue and get Congress to alter the rule for everyone in a similar situation. That’s either the function of progress or political correctness. My guess is that it’s a fair amount of both.
That fucking-giantg- koran will be used again for Omar to swear oath as newly-elected congresswoman?
Ilhan Omar Controversy: Where Does She Get Her Views?

“Koran 5:052 – O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends but kill them all!”

As Hamas was attacking Israel in 2012 and bombarding its civilian population with Grad and Qassam rockets, Ilhan Omar — who was recently elected to Congress (D-MN) — tweeted “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evils of Israel.”

During her campaign, she defended that statement, saying it was not anti-Semitic. “Drawing attention to the apartheid Israeli regime is far from hating Jews,” she declared. Israel an apartheid state? Israel is evil? Where did she get these views?

We know from writers such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali that Islamist anti-Semitism in Somalia runs deep. (There is also the country’s history of discriminating against their own Bantu people, an ethnic minority in Somalia.)

I learned too, from first-hand experience, about Islamist anti-Semitism in Somalia when I did prison interviews in Minneapolis’ Hennepin County Jail. The Somalians there had never even met a Jew nor knew anything about what Jews believe.  Yet they were virulently anti-Semitic. (It was a classic case of learned anti-Semitism – the “anti-Semitism- without-Jews syndrome.”)

At the core of anti-Semitism is paranoia and self-hate. Somali Muslims who are anti-Semites project their own rage onto the Jew, casting off to the Jew what they hate about themselves.

With the advent of brutal Islamism in Somalia (which began clandestinely in 1975, then openly in 1991 when the state collapsed) on top of a horrendous clan system perpetuating violence (especially against little girls whose genitals are mutilated), there is no longer a stable, pluralistic society in Somalia composed of diverse ethnicities and religions as there once was.

Believe it or not, there were once Christians and even Jews in the Somalian Horn of Africa for thousands of years. More recently, in the 19th century, Somalia was home to a diverse trading network, which extended from New York to Yemen to Somalia and continued all the way to Indonesia.

With the outbreak of the Arab-Israeli Six Day War in 1967, the Jews were summarily deported from Somalia, forced to leave everything behind as they fled for their lives. This outrageous deportation took place only seven years after Israel so graciously and bravely become the first country to recognize the newly independent nation of Somalia in 1960.

Israel has taken in Somalis who have sought asylum in their country. Some of these immigrants are receiving help to pursue higher education. The president of Somalia also made an unofficial visit to Tel Aviv several years ago.

Yet Omar believes Israel is hypnotizing the world to do evil? Omar manifests a typical kind of destructive and limited Islamist thinking and behavior. When Omar greeted her audience after the election with the words “As-Salam-Alaikum,” she unwittingly disclosed more of this bias. Instead of maintaining professional neutrality and inclusiveness (she is now a public servant for all Americans), she used words she knew well that would exclude many.

During her campaign, Omar claimed that she did not support the Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) movement against Israel. Yet just days after she was elected, she stated that she, in fact, believes in and supports the BDS movement, exhibiting a stunning duplicity. Omar needs to think again. As the Somali proverb goes: Waran Kugu Soo Noqon doona lama Rido, don’t throw a spear that can come back to you.

Ilhan Omar and her Alleged Marriage to her ‘Brother’. Fact or Fiction? Even after two years on the job as Minnesota’s first Somali-American legislator, a 2016 inquiry into Ilhan Omar’s alleged immigration fraud has stood the test of time, remaining open while ultimately questioning the validity of her candidacy as the Congresswoman of District B60.

Reportedly, she partook in a bigamous union with her second husband and alleged ‘brother,’ Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, whom she attended North Dakota State University with from 2009 to 2012, and later filed for a still-pending divorce back in 2011. He then returned home to the United Kingdom, as a British national, upon graduation.

Following the allegations of immigration fraud, which has yet to be substantiated, it was found that her marriage to her first husband and father to her three children, Ahmed Hirsi, was never done through the state—meaning there are no records of her union to him, which she claims was a “traditional” or “community” marriage.

However, what was genuinely bizarre regarding the controversy was that Hirsi was listed as her husband in campaign pamphlets ahead of the 2016 60B primary, despite never legally divorcing her second husband—whom she married through the state back in 2009.

As one peels back at the layers of this seemingly nothing-burger, one finds that there may be more to this kerfuffle than meets the eye. Indeed, some may be wondering as to whether or not the now-Minnesota legislator was covering up this scandalous union, which, if proven, would be grounds to rescind her eligibility to assume office in any capacity. Perhaps this was indeed a fake news story—a hit piece done by a right-wing tabloid that lacked both the credibility and proof to substantiate such a “serious accusation”?

However, Powerline, the conservative outlet responsible for pushing the “she married her brother” narrative, was responsible for covering a scandal involving George W. Bush and a series of forged documents surrounding his tenure with the Texas Air National Guard that has since been proven.

Therefore, claiming Powerline to be a tabloid-style paper in an attempt to divert the mere curiosity of the reporters, does nothing to assuage said curiosity. They were well within their in reporting on this by her marriage licenses, or lack thereof, alone. Thus, Omar had a bit of a PR problem on her hands, which ultimately proved inconsequential in her eventual election victory back in late-2016.

Somali-Muslim terrorists murdered non-Muslims in Nairobi's Westgate Mall (2013).
Related posts at following links:
Somali-Muslim Terrorists Slaughtered Non-Muslims In Nairobi Mall.
Somiali-Muslim Terrorists Slaughter 148 Christian Students in Kenya.
Al-Shabab: Somali-Muslim Terrorists