Swiss Train Staff Facing Faceless Quandary?

========

Suppose you’re a ticket inspector on a Swiss train and you come across the nightmarish creature in the photo above.

I use the bag-head photo simply because it was included in the media report that led me to write on today’s cause for concern – apparently it’s ‘Nora Illi, the women’s representative of an unofficial group called the Islamic Central Committee of Switzerland.’

Well, it might be her, but then again, it might be me!

Or anyone else who had stolen, borrowed or otherwise acquired the scary shrouded person’s rail-card.

Obviously, you, as an inspector, have the right to see the face behind the sectarian shroud, so you can do your job and compare it to the likeness on the card.

NOT so!

Incredibly, we read that –

The Swiss government hopes to introduce a new law that would make it illegal for people to refuse to uncover their face when asked to do so by government officials, transport staff or privately-contracted ticket inspectors.

Huh?

Switzerland’s federal authorities are only NOW looking at passing legislation to give public sector officials the right to require compliance, at least in the fields of immigration and a few others, like aviation and rail transport? https://www.thelocal.ch/20180628/swiss-government-outlines-counterproposal-to-burqa-ban,

So meanwhile, burka bints, and anyone else skulking behind a mask, can simply refuse to show their faces?

Time indeed to fix this, and a mere fine, as envisaged, is hardly an adequate penalty for recalcitrant refusal.

.

Uppities like that should be hauled off to the cop-shop, unmasked and held, not just until the fine is paid, but until they sign an enforceable undertaking NEVER to don the primitive shroud again.   

 

 

Hey – It’s February 1st! World Hijab Day!

On World Hijab Day, I want to be fair-minded, and admit that the appearance of some women would be VASTLY improved by not just a hijab but a full-on burka.

Here are two, with the links to relevant posts.

—————

• Coletta Manemann – The Worst Woman in Germany?
• …………….
• .
• The Walking Brain-Dead?- Sex-Obsessed Melissa ‘Muscle!’ 

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Having said that, I now offer a brief selection of previous posts, which confirm that those silly girls who don the head-scarf are not complying with any religious requirement, merely flaunting their show-off sectarianism.

00000000000000000000

‘An Archaic Tribal Rag’ – Wise UK Muslim Imam Says ‘Ban the Burqa!’ 

It’s on the BBC! Bag-Head Bans Do Not Infringe Religious Liberty! 

Fiery Islamists – ‘Head-Scarves NOT a Big Issue!’ 

ooooooooooooooo

And, once you’ve read those, here’s a few photos of how women SHOULD look!

—————–

like Baby Margaretha…

 

===

And Roro Fitria…

ooooooooooo

Not to mention the outstanding Nikita Mirzani…

…..  

oooooooooooooooooooooooooo

And if you like them, you’ll probably enjoy these older RRA posts…

Matahari, Alexa Michiko and Nasi Goreng Bacon! 

Kasihan Zuhal Sengul – Hot Turkish Delight Fired By Kill-Joys! 

 

Beard Bollocks in UK – But Tajiks Confront Alien Influence!

In 2015, the United State Supreme Court produced some of the most inane rulings ever, the worst of course being its indefensible endorsement of queer ‘marriage.’

=========================

• 
• —————-

• But one that’s sometimes been overlooked, as an example of judicial dimwittery, occurred almost exactly a year ago, when the court exemplified what many Americans see as its role as Nine Men Against America.
• It decreed that Muslim criminals had a ‘right’ to sport beards.

High Court Says Muslim Inmate Can Keep Beard – WSJ

 Let’s ignore the individual who won his case – a self-described Islamic fundamentalist who the state said threatened to wage jihad against law-enforcement officials.

–

 –

He was convicted of threatening President George W Bush’s daughters a decade ago, and is serving a life term for stabbing his girlfriend., – except to say it would make much better sense to string him up than prattle about his rights.

So on to the latest news from the UK.

—

Vicars should grow BEARDS to reach out to Muslims in their areas, says Bishop of London 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3412363/Bishop-London-applauds-vicars-grown-beards-reach-Muslims-Tower-Hamlets.html

This turbulent priest says his beard helps his rapport with Bangladeshis in his diocese – they’ve been there for years but apparently many are still recalcitrantly refusing to smarten up and adapt to British ways. He’s certainly not helping them assimilate with his pathetic appeasement.

But what needs to be made clear is this – 

It’s complete BOLLOCKS to say that growing and maintaining a beard is any part of a Muslim man’s religious duty.

———-

•  Sukarno, Founder and first President of Indonesia
•   Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, President till a year ago
• ———————

• I could post photos of every Indonesian President since independence – all Muslims and all (except Megawati) men – you’d see not one beard.

Even fanatic Muslims, like the ghastly Suryadharma Ali, and Anis Matta, till recently leader of the PKS Islamist party and big fan of Osama Bin Laden…

—-

 Ali

 Anis

—-

…are beardless.

Not all fanatics have visible chins, of course, but it goes to show it’s a matter of choice, identical to Muslim women’s choice when it comes to head-scarves.

————-

——-

A ban on beards is no denial of religious liberty, any more than a burka ban, or even a head-scarf ban.

I’m motivated to pen a few words on the subject not just because of the Babbling Bishop, but due to the news from Tajikistan, where my stats indicate I have one or two readers. The BBC tells us that numerous men have been forcibly shaven.

If a guy grows a beard because he thinks it will enhance his cool, I’d not bother him. Dislike of a fashion is not a great reason to call for a ban.

——-

——-

Though the fashion nowadays among some men, of appearing unshaven every day – apparently called ‘designer stubble’ – is so slovenly that a ban is a tempting call to make.

And it’s proper to admit that when I was considerably younger than I am today, my chin was adorned with quite a good beard, emulating the singer in one of my fave Sixties pop bands, Manfred Mann.

No moustache, just the beard, very distinctive and SO cool (or so  I thought then!)

——–

—-

But in today’s Tajikistan, the move against beards is seen as part of a broader government campaign against the adoption of Islamic cultural practices in Tajik society, and to preserve secular traditions. 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35372754

The Beeb reports that almost 100% of Tajiks are Muslim. Yet the government is waging war on beards?

Why?

Because it is alarmed at the emergence of the evil jihadist ideology.

It does seem to be true that, as opposed to simply fanatical believers, the scum who join terrorist outfits and commit atrocities DO wear beards, except when they need to disguise themselves from the security forces.

They may do so for ‘religious’ reasons, although satanic beasts like those below are hardly ‘religious’ in any meaningful sense, but…

———————

a, 

————–

…they do succeed in making themselves look evil.

However, a beard is not, in and of itself, proof of wickedness.

So is the Tajik campaign justified?

I’m not convinced that force-shaving is either fair or wise. Like I said, some lads think they’re cooler by not shaving. Others have weak chins they wish to hide.

But a campaign of persuasion is easily defensible. If the government points out that monsters like Imam Samoedra…

——–..

 Bali Bomb Pig with a paltry excuse for a beard

———

…the infamous Bali Bom Pig, are hardly role-models for any decent human being, you’d hope your average Tajik would nod in agreement.

And if there are some who flaunt their facial hair as a gesture of solidarity with evil, then surely it makes them all the easier to spot!

Nice to see, BTW, that a campaign to persuade Tajik women to skip the scarf of subjugation  – they’ve apparently convinced 1,773 women to stop wearing hijabs this past year – and to eschew black in favour of the nation’s traditional bright colours, is under way. 

 

Canada Crack-Pot Court Grovels – Sign the Petition, Ban Bag-Heads!

==============================

Ever since Pierre Turdo subverted Canada’s parliamentary system by inserting his rotten ‘charter’ into the repatriated constitution, the courts have been elevating minorities, often unwholesome minorities, to privileged positions beyond the reach of democratic control.

—————-

————-

This week we have news, arguably the worst example yet, an arrogant bigot bag-head authorised to hide her fanatic features while taking her oath of citizenship.

Muslim women are of course not obliged to wear bags over their faces, nor even head-scarves. We’ve covered this before.

‘An Archaic Tribal Rag’ – Wise UK Muslim Imam Says ‘Ban the Burqa!’ 

It’s on the BBC! Bag-Head Bans Do Not Infringe Religious Liberty! 

Fiery Islamists – ‘Head-Scarves NOT a Big Issue!’ 

Only the worst sort of subservient, the sort who exults in her second-class shariah status, would dream of donning an uglifying shroud, peering out from an absurd eye-gap.

And that’s the kind that shouldn’t be granted citizenship in ANY civilised country.

–

• 
• =
• Harper is in a tight race in Canada’s current election campaign. He should make this an issue, curb the crazy courts and invoke the ‘notwithstanding clause,’ if need be, to outlaw primitive practices.

Meanwhile, Canadians should not leave it to the politicians, or the courts!

 For a fine piece of campaigning coverage, with links to a petition, here’s what you need – http://www.therebel.media/showyourface.

Hello? Harper, Cameron, Abbott? Learn from Chad’s Bag-Head Ban!

=======================

Now here’s a lesson that Canada, Australia and the UK could usefully learn…

====================

• 
• ……………………

• …from Muslim-majority Chad, as described in AlJazeera!
• Like all three of Her Majesty’s realms, Chad has come under attack by Islamist savages, in their case the brutal Boko Haram beasts.

But UNLIKE the timorous leaderships in Ottawa, London and Canberra, the Chadians aren’t reluctant to take needful action.

“This attack just confirms that a ban on the full-face veil was justified,” national police spokesman Paul Manga said, adding that “it now must be respected more than ever by the entire population.”

===

===

“Anyone who does not obey the law will be automatically arrested and brought to justice,” he warned.  http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/07/chad-police-wearing-face-veils-arrested-150712143747203.html

We all know very well that the garb imposed on women by backward bigots lends itself all too readily to undesirable, anti-social activity.

“Very Tall Figure – Full Islamic Burka – Voted 3 Times!” 

But of course it is not only on security grounds that this uglifying garment should be banned. It is grossly offensive to democratic principles that anyone should demand that women be confined behind shrouds while men are free to go about unshrouded.

If aliens wish to behave in benighted fashion this in their own lands, that’s their problem, till they haul their sorry asses into the modern world. As Canada at least has gone some way to recognising.

‘The Zero-Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act’ –Canada Tells It Like it Is! 

CIVILISED  countries should NOT accommodate primitive customs that affront women’s rights – as the burka most certainly does.

The Glory That Was Egypt – When Women Were Unashamed To Be Women!

Just watched an unusually balanced report on EuroNews, about a beautiful Egyptian gal who decided she wanted to look like a woman and dispensed with the scarf of subjugation.

The backward bints where she worked instantly refused to speak to her, gave her the cold shoulder in every possible way – typical of the self-righteous cows who take perverse pride in flaunting their second-class citizen status.

But what was also interesting was the flashback photos of Egyptian women in the 1950s and 1960s. I’d been there, in the mid-1980s, and the people were friendly and polite. Certainly, a lot of the (very attractive ) women then were un-bagged.

But twenty years previous to that?

Wow!

I was so surprised that I checked Google photo archives to see for myself.

============

•  None of that shrouding crap back then!

—

 

============

And none of that primitive crap about separate bathing that sectarian fanatics are demanding in Australia and Canada. 

There are plenty more photos of the old much more civilised Egypt on this link.

http://all-that-is-interesting.com/1960s-egypt Let’s hope some day all the Middle East will once more reenter the modern world. 

Happy Nowruz to Free Iran!

It seems I have some readers from Iran – I can’t say IN Iran, because while that poor country remains under the sectarian despotism known as the ‘Islamic Republic,’ it’s probably risky for them to tune in to anti-ayatollah blogs!

00

00

But the huge diaspora retains the real spirit of that enslaved nation, and I was just watching some of them on tv, in Brighton, UK, of all places, enjoying their Nowruz New Year celebrations.

Not one of the pretty women was shrouded. They wore short skirts, let their lovely hair flow free, and in every other way too, looked like women, not subjugated bag-head second class citizens.

oo

oo

Couldn’t find a picture of that little party, but in a previous post, we used this one, to illustrate our point Breaking News – Traffic Chaos in Tehran? 

The only proper seasonal wish is that NEXT Nowruz can be celebrated in Tehran, with every citizen there free from the vile clerics’ tyranny and every woman free to display all the beauty bestown on them by their Creator.

Breaking News – Armed Savages Open Fire on Tunisia Parliament!

Tunisia has been one of the most civilised and successful survivors of the Arab Spring.

Despite Islamist intolerance rearing its extremely ugly head, the small country has recently held elections and got a government that’s opposed to the evil fanaticism we’ve seen next door in Libya.

———–

Look Who Won Tunisia’s Election! 

  NORMAL Tunisian women!

————-

And anytime you see newsreel images of the country, the women, mostly, are attractively dressed, no repulsive head-shrouding. A minor issue, you may say, but it’s generally indicative of how advanced a nation is.

But tonight, just in, news that ‘three gunmen’ have attacked the elected assembly in Tunis. No IDs yet, but am willing to bet it’s the Forces of Darkness trying to make a come-back. Gunmen ‘take hostages’ in attack on Tunisia parliament Telegraph.co.uk

I hope the security forces terminate the SOBs with extreme prejudice.

Postscript several hours later.

It now turns out that satanists aka jihadists were indeed responsible for an outrage much worse than we first realised. Innocent foreign and Tunisian visitors to the big museum in Tunis have been murdered. ISIS has apparently praised the pigs who committed the crimes.

Let’s hope Tunisia follows Jordan’s admirable example, takes however many terrorists they may have behind bars straight to the nearest yard and executes them without delay. 

The Real ‘Shock?’ Brandis Offered Trigg ANY OTHER Job!

So that abominable pinko  Gillian Triggs thinks she’s immune from ‘political interference?‘ But she herself is perfectly at liberty to interfere in political matters? Can’t have it both ways, honey!

You’re paid from the public purse, so if you can’t stand the heat, etc….

Triggs remains opaque about her politics…

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/meet-gillian-triggs-the-woman-taking-on-immigration-minister-scott-morrison-

I’ll bet she does!

George Brandis is surely correct when he says the Human Rights Commission had become “fatally politically compromised” after Triggs’ bizarre intervention into the ‘asylum’ (bludger) issue.

————-

Equally, to be fair to Tony Abbott after my recent criticisms of his recent conduct Memo to Normal Aussies – Ignore Big-Mouth and Berserk!  was spot on when he declared the commission should be ashamed of itself for conducting a “blatantly partisan” exercise. 

0

0

Abbott’s condemnation arose because Trigg’s commission had kept its trap shut about the ‘plight’ of the bludgers’ brats during Labor rule, when in fact the numbers of those detained (quite properly – because their conscienceless crimmigrant parents had put them thus at risk) reached a peak.

But in fact, Trigg is only a symptom of the problem.

It’s having such a sticky-beak body at all that’s wrong.

Okay, now and then we stumble across somebody in the ‘rights’ industry who actually shows a genuine interest in the real rights of real Australians.  Tim Wilson’s concern for Aussie free speech was a rare example.

——-

———-

But who needs a hugely expensive outfit, housed in a bright and shiny office, in an A Grade office tower centrally located in Sydney’s CBD with frontages on Pitt and King Streets, shrilling on behalf of bludgers, and bag-heads, and  some creep who arrived from Papua by canoe in 1985. He was granted a protection visa 11 years later, but this was after he had committed a range of criminal offences dating from 1986.  Gillian Triggs: the Australian’s latest victim – The Guardian

Even the Guardian, above, admits that the said creep killed somebody,

But notwithstanding that, Trigg, in her official capacity, recommended he get $350,000 compensation because, in the light of his lawless activities, his protection visa was revoked and so quite properly, he has been detained, with no complaints from the Australian populace, who have enough no-goods committing a range of criminal offences without needing that number topped up.

Who needs scumbags like that in Oz anyway?

Trigg disagrees.

And her Commission does, because that’s the mentality there. An unhealthy obsession with the ‘rights’ of undesirables, which is totally out of step with normal people’s thinking.

I’ll bet if you ask the man and woman in the Sydney street, who not only pay Trigg’s fat salary ( I can’t find the precise figure, but for sure it’s more than the sum total of a Melbourne fireman’s, a Brisbane dustman’s and a Sydney cop’s, each of whom does something USEFUL for the community)

…………….

…

 – and don’t forget those humble tax-paying citizens would also be required to stump up the killer’s $350,000 –

——–

——-

 

oooooooo00

…they’d say send the ratbag back to Indonesia!

And maybe take Trigg and Co with him!