• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

The Islamic Dilemma

Politically Correct Schoolgirls Cover Up Their Own Sex Attacks At Hands Of Migrants
Pupils at the Herder school in Kassel, Germany have been subjected to months of sexual assault by “much older” migrant males on their way to and from school, dating back as far as September 2015. The three girls aged between 16 and 18 were repeatedly touched inappropriately and verbally abused, but they refused to report the incidents to the police or their school because the perpetrators were “refugees”.

German newspaper the Hessian Niedersächsische Allgemeine reports the girls realised the “social-political” implications of their reporting their crimes, with the significant amount of press attention swirling around migrant sex assault, leading to them becoming what the paper identified as “paralysed by political correctness”.

One of the girls, identified by the pseudonym ‘Anna’, said of their decision to suppress the sex attacks: “We do not want refugees to be discriminated against. We do not want people making sweeping accusations [about migrants], [and we didn’t want to] foment bad blood”. The school says “many others may have experienced this harassment as well”.

The girls were finally persuaded to come forward by a victim support group called ‘Kassel Help’, and they revealed how they were targeted by the men on public transport. The migrants who attacked them would find their way onto the same buses and trams daily to get near the girls, who were touched on the breasts, bottom, and between the legs. The report states “hardly a day went without harassment”.

Called “whores” to their faces, groups of up to seven men would approach them at tram stops, shouting “Girls! Girls! Girls!”. ‘Anna’ said the abuse “felt very threatening”, but came as a surprise, as the abuse started on their very first day of the new school term. She said “I had not expected it at all.”

The attacks had put other girls at the school off using public transport altogether.

Speaking to the Hessian Allgemeine, Steffi Burmester of the ‘Together Against Sexual Violence’ group said the organisation had seen a “huge” increase in sex violence come with the arrival of large numbers of “male migrants”. This was a phenomenon she attributed to the men coming from cultures with “different views of women”, and a desire to reclaim lost masculinity after the “fear and humiliation” of being a migrant. Whether that is a credible reason or not, Ms. Burmester said it was “no excuse”.

Given the sudden surge in sex crimes in Germany and other European countries by predominantly Muslim migrants, it is ironic that the news of these attacks comes just weeks after pupils from the school went on a ‘ethics’ class trip to their local mosque.

According to a class report posted to the school website, one pupil said after the visit: “Overall, the trip was an enriching experience for the classroom and has brought us closer to the religion.”

These children are not the first to lie about sexual abuse because it doesn’t fit the mainstream narrative about defenceless, and peaceful refugees. Breitbart London reported on the case of a young female no-borders activist who was gang raped by Sudanese migrants in the shower block of a camp on the French-Italian border in 2015. The other migrants in the camp were having a party and playing music, so her cries were unheard.

Subsequently, after persuasion by other activists the woman decided not to report her rape because to do so would set back her dream of a borderless world. After she betrayed the political ideals of the other volunteers at the camp and reported the abuse, some of her fellow activists accused her of doing so out of “spite”.
Click to expand...
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/11/schoolgirls-cover-migrant-sex-assaults-political-correctness/
 
Germany to end unofficial tolerance of polygamy
Germany is to end its unofficial tolerance of polygamy - including marriages involving minors, the country's justice minister has vowed.

Heiko Maas said the move was designed to prevent people in Germany committing to more than one marriage.

“No one who comes to us has the right to put their cultural roots, or their religious beliefs, above our laws,” Mr Maas told Bild newspaper.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/germany-will-not-recognise-polygamy-or-underage-marriages-a7083751.html
 
A record store in "moderate" Istanbul, Turkey was hosting a release event for the new Radiohead album when pissed off Muslims shut it down, cause it was Ramadan.
 
Hate doing this, but some opinions need to be public domain. Ripped from the WSJ...

Britain and Obama’s ‘Back of the Queue’
I hope that Americans who know what self-government means to a free people will rally to the cause of an independent Britain.
By Andrew Roberts
June 17, 2016 6:12 p.m. ET

On June 23 the British people will be going to the polls to choose whether they want to continue with the present system whereby 60% of British laws are made in Brussels and foreign judges decide whether those laws are legitimate or not, or whether we want to strike out for independence and the right to make all of our own laws and have our own British judges decide upon them.

It’s about whether we can recapture the right to deport foreign Islamist hate preachers and terrorist suspects, or whether under European human-rights legislation they must continue to reside in the U.K., often at taxpayers’ expense. The European Union is currently experiencing migration on a scale not seen since the late 17th century—with hordes of young, mostly male Muslims sweeping from the southeast into the heart of Europe. Angela Merkel invited them in and that might be fine for Germany, but why should they have the right to settle in Britain as soon as they get a European passport?

Surely—surely—this is an issue on which the British people, and they alone, have the right to decide, without the intervention of President Obama, who adopted his haughtiest professorial manner when lecturing us to stay in the EU, before making the naked threat that we would be sent “to the back of the queue” (i.e., the back of the line) in any future trade deals if we had the temerity to vote to leave.

Was my country at the back of the line when Winston Churchill promised in 1941 that in the event of a Japanese attack on the U.S., a British declaration of war on Japan would be made within the hour?

Was Great Britain at the back of the line when America was searching for allies in the Korean War in the 1950s?

When America decided to liberate Kuwait from Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War in the early 1990s, was Britain at the back of the line when we contributed an armored division that fought on your right flank during Operation Desert Storm?

Were we at the back of the line on 9/11, or did we step forward immediately and instinctively as the very first of your allies to contribute troops to join you in the expulsion of the Taliban, al Qaeda’s hosts, from power in Afghanistan?

Or in Iraq two years later, was it the French or the Germans or the Belgians who stood and fought and bled beside you? Whatever views you might have over the rights or wrongs of that war, no one can deny that Britain was in its accustomed place: at the front of the line, in the firing line. So it is not right for President Obama now to threaten to send us to the back of the line.

Britain is the largest foreign investor in the U.S.—larger even than China—so it makes no economic sense for you to send us to the back of the line. Yet quite apart from your economic or strategic best interests, it also makes no moral sense for America to treat your genuine friends (you also see this phenomenon in the case of Israel, of course) as though they are your enemies, while all too often you treat your rivals and enemies—Cuba, China, Venezuela and others—as though they’re your friends. In what sane world does America put Iran at the front of the line for trade deals, while sending Britain to the back?

President Obama might be very clever intellectually, but he hasn’t grasped the central essence of American foreign policy over the centuries, which is the honorable one of being a strength and beacon to your allies and a standing reproach and constant source of anxiety to your enemies and to the enemies of freedom.

Fortunately, the best kind of Americans instinctively understand that truth, and outside the Obama administration nobody seems to want to relegate my country to the back of the line. Anglo-American friendship is far stronger than any one administration or government. I’ve lost count of the number of times that I’ve read the obituaries of people who have written the obituary of the Special Relationship. It survives because it lives on in the hearts of our two peoples—who have so much more in common than that which separates us—rather than just in the pages of venerable treaties and history books.

The good news is that the British people don’t seem to have taken much notice of President Obama—indeed, on the day he left the U.K., the Leave campaign actually saw a 2% increase in the polls. (As it’s neck and neck at the moment, perhaps we should invite him back?)
The endless threats about trade deals and GDP per capita from the EU and the IMF and the World Bank and the OECD, instead of cowing the British people, seem merely to have excited their bloody-mindedness. They recognize that they might indeed take a short-term financial hit, but there are some things more important than money.

Imagine if a bunch of accountants had turned up at Valley Forge in that brutal winter of 1777 and proved with the aid of pie-charts and financial tables that Americans would be better off if they just gave up the cause of independence. George Washington would have sent them off with a few short, well-chosen words on the subject—probably derived from the Anglo-Saxon.
Winston Churchill was warned repeatedly by the Treasury that it was bankrupting Britain to continue her lonely and seemingly doomed struggle against the power that utterly dominated the entire European Continent in 1940 and 1941, but he treated all such warnings with his characteristically coruscating ire. That is what people do who love their country, and that is what I hope my countrymen will do on June 23.

And if we do vote to leave the EU on Thursday, I hope that Americans with a sense of history, Americans with a sense of tradition who honor friendship past and future, above all Americans who know what self-government means to a free people, will rally to the cause of an independent Britain.

Mr. Roberts is the author of “Napoleon: A Life” (Viking, 2014). This is adapted from his remarks upon receiving a Bradley Prize from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., June 15.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top