The habit to jot down PC the absurdities of our virtuous" elites interferes with other topics. The dumb stuff if we dare to register it as what it is confirms an old insight that came during a lecture; we are with our consent badly governed". A PC-woven shroud of confusion hinders the pillorying of insanity because it makes calling a spade a spade into a political crime. Alas the trick often works.
Multiplying terrorist attacks on tolerant societies elicit a ritual official response. It is that we will not submit to terror". Sounds good. Until you listen. Doing that you discover that the chosen ones who incant the phrase at funerals are the ones that allow radicals and their terror to thrive.
One of the clever ways to participate in the moral outrage while letting terrorists blossom is to open the borders for them to settle at the scene of their future crime.
In several European countries a person can get refugee status for maltreatment at home. Example: Being a persecuted Taliban gets you asylum in Germany. That means protection for Islamists because their own country leans on them. That makes because of their opinion" persecuted victims out of radicals. So the victim" has a right to be admitted and to be shielded. By that logic Nazi camp guards should be sheltered by Israel because they are persecuted elsewhere.
For the normally thinking contemporary a point that healthy minds might miss needs emphasis. Currently if an individual who becomes guilty in country A" by violating a reasonable local law can ask for asylum in country B". Certain elements in B" will want to give protection even if their own laws criminalize the deed for which that person is wanted in A". The result: B" grants refuge to someone who will continue as a political criminal. That becomes even more absurd if as in the case of Islamists the harbored victim" negates the values of the community that is to shelter him.
Sounds weird? Usually a yes" is a reason to dismiss a speculation. In this case the oddness signals a duplicated example. Its venue is Switzerland a democracy which being partly governed by plebiscites produces relatively few scandals. The case is worth your attention because its basics will soon visit you wherever you live.
The background of what follows is the latest" series of attacks by Islamists against their Spanish-Catalan benefactors.
About that atrocity often a nave question is raised. Why do radicals conduct their war in the province of Catalonia when the local separatists -they dislike Madrid more than Mohammed- accommodate anti-Spanish Muslims? A further sign of confusion is that when alerted by Madrid Catalonia claimed that the warning expresses excessive concerns and so it refused to resort to indiscriminate" measures.
In itself the question and the connected dismissal of the possibility of a threat reveals faulty thinking". The attacks aim to reverse the Reconquista" of the caliphate of Al-Andalus". Whether the natives are pliable is immaterial. Meanwhile the local government believes that Madrid being its enemy and that of the radicals will make them friends. The upshot is a largesse that facilitates the work of terror cells to combat the faithless. Therefore the right response to why do they act that way?" is that they act that way to exploit an opportunity. The lesson: You cannot buy your way out of an ideological war fought to destroy you by being accommodating.
Now keeping in mind that the smart learn from the mistakes of others (those that repeat their own mistakes are idiots) back to the Swiss case. It is not „pretty" and it reflects PCs wrong-headed problem management
Fuzzy thinking assumes that moral outrage can replace preventive solutions. When Islamists do their killing the response is uniform. The attack is unrelated to religion therefore accommodation shall continue. Thus never mention Islamist radicalism" and look the other way until they love us and forgive what we are doing for them.
In 1998 Abu Ramadan successfully requested protection in Switzerland. Today he is a permanent resident. Since then the professional victim has not learned any one of the local languages and has never worked. Well not quite. He found a niche in retail trade and so he sat in jail for five years for a drug offense. Upon his release the Lybians business plan changed and he became an Imam.
Supposedly he did that for free - an undeclared income would be criminal. However generosity did not bring poverty. In his new career Ramadan got $ 630 000 from a left-green run city. (No wonder that naturalized migrants vote left.)
Ramadan must have been impressed by the largesse. To prove that hear his prayer. „Oh God I am begging you to destroy our enemies... kill the Jews the Christians ... the Russians and the Shiites." Destroy them ... to return Islams old glory". Of course this is not fully legally actionable as it is Allah who is being asked to kill and not the members of the congregation. It is a telling sign of the failure of integration and of lacking loyalty that for years no one reported the incitement to violence.
That mention of integration triggers a recall. Apparently the desire to adjust lacks. A detail tells the larger story. One of the cantons here budgets millions for laguage courses and handed out over 5000 vouchers. 1226 migrants made use of the opportunity. In a way that attitude makes sense. For the many illiterates learning a language is a challenge. Even if no language means no job why work if the welfare is generous? Furthermore God with a bit of help by the faithful - will destroy „them". So it makes little sense to learn their tongue or to adapt to their ways.
At the time of this writing the preacher has problems. First it looks bad that in behalf of a travel agency he guides first-class pilgrims to Mekka. Allegedly that effort too is not renumerated. However his bank account shows strange activities. Even more serious is that he has lost his status as a refugee because he repeatedly returns to Lybya where his life is supposedly in danger. Additionally his residency peremit is being investigated. If the generally pro- migrant bureacracy decides to revoke it then Ramadan might be repatriated.
You have noticed the conditional above: it is not caused by a careless formulation. An adjunct problem of illegal migration in PC „irregular migration"- is that if caught its participant cannot be sent home at will. Numerous states refuse to take back their citizens if they resist leaving the the country that ordered repatriation.
Generally sympathecic bureaus accept the facts created by that refusal and so „temporary" permits to stay are issued. With the growth of the numbers involved benevolent submission is being slowly abandoned. Governments whose personel tends to equate deportation with „racism" are made to act. The preferred approach is to promise money for taking back the reluctant and the number of those is reduced by paying them. Occasionally some capitals begin to dare to mention that to respond to lacking cooperation aid to non-compliant regimes might be reduced. So far there is not much talk of a logical flanking measure which is to put recalcitrant aliens into holding areas that can be left at wish in order to return home.
The self-created dilemma involving refused uninvited guests is of importance because those officially tagged as „illegals" tend to „go underground". Obviously those doing so must live the lives of criminals. The helplesness shown tells much about the lacking will for self-defense and the inability to insist determinedly respect for the law of the land. Most importantly the paralysis reflects an unwillingness to accept that there is such a thing as an enemy. Furthermore it needss to sink in that those that declare themself to be enemies might really mean what they say and what they ask God to help them to accomplish.
The habit to jot down PC the absurdities of our virtuous" elites interferes with other topics. The dumb stuff if we dare to register it as what it is confirms an old insight that came during a lecture; we are with our consent badly governed". A PC-woven shroud of confusion hinders the pillorying of insanity because it makes calling a spade a spade into a political crime. Alas the trick often works.
Multiplying terrorist attacks on tolerant societies elicit a ritual official response. It is that we will not submit to terror". Sounds good. Until you listen. Doing that you discover that the chosen ones who incant the phrase at funerals are the ones that allow radicals and their terror to thrive.
One of the clever ways to participate in the moral outrage while letting terrorists blossom is to open the borders for them to settle at the scene of their future crime.
In several European countries a person can get refugee status for maltreatment at home. Example: Being a persecuted Taliban gets you asylum in Germany. That means protection for Islamists because their own country leans on them. That makes because of their opinion" persecuted victims out of radicals. So the victim" has a right to be admitted and to be shielded. By that logic Nazi camp guards should be sheltered by Israel because they are persecuted elsewhere.
For the normally thinking contemporary a point that healthy minds might miss needs emphasis. Currently if an individual who becomes guilty in country A" by violating a reasonable local law can ask for asylum in country B". Certain elements in B" will want to give protection even if their own laws criminalize the deed for which that person is wanted in A". The result: B" grants refuge to someone who will continue as a political criminal. That becomes even more absurd if as in the case of Islamists the harbored victim" negates the values of the community that is to shelter him.
Sounds weird? Usually a yes" is a reason to dismiss a speculation. In this case the oddness signals a duplicated example. Its venue is Switzerland a democracy which being partly governed by plebiscites produces relatively few scandals. The case is worth your attention because its basics will soon visit you wherever you live.
The background of what follows is the latest" series of attacks by Islamists against their Spanish-Catalan benefactors.
About that atrocity often a nave question is raised. Why do radicals conduct their war in the province of Catalonia when the local separatists -they dislike Madrid more than Mohammed- accommodate anti-Spanish Muslims? A further sign of confusion is that when alerted by Madrid Catalonia claimed that the warning expresses excessive concerns and so it refused to resort to indiscriminate" measures.
In itself the question and the connected dismissal of the possibility of a threat reveals faulty thinking". The attacks aim to reverse the Reconquista" of the caliphate of Al-Andalus". Whether the natives are pliable is immaterial. Meanwhile the local government believes that Madrid being its enemy and that of the radicals will make them friends. The upshot is a largesse that facilitates the work of terror cells to combat the faithless. Therefore the right response to why do they act that way?" is that they act that way to exploit an opportunity. The lesson: You cannot buy your way out of an ideological war fought to destroy you by being accommodating.
Now keeping in mind that the smart learn from the mistakes of others (those that repeat their own mistakes are idiots) back to the Swiss case. It is not „pretty" and it reflects PCs wrong-headed problem management
Fuzzy thinking assumes that moral outrage can replace preventive solutions. When Islamists do their killing the response is uniform. The attack is unrelated to religion therefore accommodation shall continue. Thus never mention Islamist radicalism" and look the other way until they love us and forgive what we are doing for them.
In 1998 Abu Ramadan successfully requested protection in Switzerland. Today he is a permanent resident. Since then the professional victim has not learned any one of the local languages and has never worked. Well not quite. He found a niche in retail trade and so he sat in jail for five years for a drug offense. Upon his release the Lybians business plan changed and he became an Imam.
Supposedly he did that for free - an undeclared income would be criminal. However generosity did not bring poverty. In his new career Ramadan got $ 630 000 from a left-green run city. (No wonder that naturalized migrants vote left.)
Ramadan must have been impressed by the largesse. To prove that hear his prayer. „Oh God I am begging you to destroy our enemies... kill the Jews the Christians ... the Russians and the Shiites." Destroy them ... to return Islams old glory". Of course this is not fully legally actionable as it is Allah who is being asked to kill and not the members of the congregation. It is a telling sign of the failure of integration and of lacking loyalty that for years no one reported the incitement to violence.
That mention of integration triggers a recall. Apparently the desire to adjust lacks. A detail tells the larger story. One of the cantons here budgets millions for laguage courses and handed out over 5000 vouchers. 1226 migrants made use of the opportunity. In a way that attitude makes sense. For the many illiterates learning a language is a challenge. Even if no language means no job why work if the welfare is generous? Furthermore God with a bit of help by the faithful - will destroy „them". So it makes little sense to learn their tongue or to adapt to their ways.
At the time of this writing the preacher has problems. First it looks bad that in behalf of a travel agency he guides first-class pilgrims to Mekka. Allegedly that effort too is not renumerated. However his bank account shows strange activities. Even more serious is that he has lost his status as a refugee because he repeatedly returns to Lybya where his life is supposedly in danger. Additionally his residency peremit is being investigated. If the generally pro- migrant bureacracy decides to revoke it then Ramadan might be repatriated.
You have noticed the conditional above: it is not caused by a careless formulation. An adjunct problem of illegal migration in PC „irregular migration"- is that if caught its participant cannot be sent home at will. Numerous states refuse to take back their citizens if they resist leaving the the country that ordered repatriation.
Generally sympathecic bureaus accept the facts created by that refusal and so „temporary" permits to stay are issued. With the growth of the numbers involved benevolent submission is being slowly abandoned. Governments whose personel tends to equate deportation with „racism" are made to act. The preferred approach is to promise money for taking back the reluctant and the number of those is reduced by paying them. Occasionally some capitals begin to dare to mention that to respond to lacking cooperation aid to non-compliant regimes might be reduced. So far there is not much talk of a logical flanking measure which is to put recalcitrant aliens into holding areas that can be left at wish in order to return home.
The self-created dilemma involving refused uninvited guests is of importance because those officially tagged as „illegals" tend to „go underground". Obviously those doing so must live the lives of criminals. The helplesness shown tells much about the lacking will for self-defense and the inability to insist determinedly respect for the law of the land. Most importantly the paralysis reflects an unwillingness to accept that there is such a thing as an enemy. Furthermore it needss to sink in that those that declare themself to be enemies might really mean what they say and what they ask God to help them to accomplish.