Jump to content

Germany's Schaeuble says if Muslim migrants don't like Europe, go elsewhere


webfact

Recommended Posts

 
Yep, the natives can't afford to live there anymore.
 
As the UK atrophies to the 3rd world, the blasted rich Asians are moving in.

To be fair, multiculturalism and weak governments have made Europe an 'easy target' for people 'on the take'
IMG_1665.JPG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

Funny how people never mention Jewish civil courts with apparently similar orthodox views on civil matters. For sure similar issues are faced in the Hindu community, African Christians etc etc.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-jewish-orthodox-councils-institutionalising-marital-captivity-and-upholding-discriminatory-a6803256.html

But this is not to the point. Schäuble's comment is on the behaviour of some Muslims (certainly not all, but it's endemic enough) towards the general majority non-Muslim populace.

 

That article you cited states: "In practice, she says, most Jewish women have civil divorces and are aware of their rights, so this act “is successful within the Jewish community”.

which is not the case in some Muslim communities. And if a given Jewish woman is fed up with the system, she can just get divorce anyway or not care, even do away with Judaism and all religion, if that is what she wishes. Might then have some social ramifications, but I have never heard of Jewish honour killings or going after apostates.

 

Besides, that used to be the same with the Catholic church up until 50 years ago, threatening eternal damnation on anyone even thinking divorce after having grudgingly accepted marriage to be a matter of civil courts. They are behaving even now a bit like that, at least in Germany. If you are employed in some kindergarten or hospital run by the catholic church and remarry after divorce, you might lose your job once they find out. They have wide leeway under the Art. 140 Basic Law and 137 Weimarer Reichsverfassung.

 

What we are seeing now is Muslim areas turning into no-go-zones, where you better wear a headscarf if female, or Muslim students spitting into other peoples' school meals in Ramadan. And that is where that comment comes in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

More likely something said to appeal to voters with elections coming up.

 

After all, this gentleman said last year, just before Brexit referendum, that "elections can't be allowed to change things in the EU".

 

Like all politicians, he'll say anything to get votes. Those pesky elections and voters.

Can only guess at his ulterior motivation, I would half trust this one with really meaning what he said there. Plus he wants to outdo Merkel and get the Conservatives on course again, some remnants of internal struggle this old warhorse is the commander-in-chief of.

 

Your quote is about the Greek elections when Tsipras was trying to wiggle out of the Euro deal and austerity measures. And in that case Schäuble was right in that Greece had consented to EU regulations concerning the Euro in the first place and then to rules that came with the "rescue packages", hence a case of "pacta sunt servanda". Does not apply to changing things either in the EU through democratic consensus, with or without national voters breathing down their individual governments' necks, or voting to quit the EU as per the regulations covering that.

 

Schäuble was even quoted more recently with "Brexit deal can be done quickly", on the whole this guy is "law-and-order" as they come, was Federal Minister of the Interior twice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, fxe1200 said:

First Europe should refrain from all military actions in the Middle East and Africa. Then it would have the right to send those refugees to those countries, which destroy their lands.

I am really glad that you think that the West/Europe should sit back and watch countries in the Middle East and Africa, Rape, commit genocide, try and wipe out whole cultures, gas people, invade other countries etc etc.  Is it not their own fault....or are the West/Europe responsible for that too?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My own post #19 here: that was obviously not Iraq/Iran, but Iraq/Syria. Iran is a totally different cup of tea.

 

From what I hear from my school buddy, still being in Germany practising as a physician, whose father is Iranian and quit being Muslim once he touched German soil to study medicine in the late sixties, to then marry what can only be described as a woman of definite German heritage, a lot of Iranians now coming to Germany as refugees are instantly converting to Christianity. With a lot of effort involved. Because Iran does not as such persecute, unless they do. Seems like using/abusing a loophole, but I have so far not heard of any of those Iranian converts falling foul of German laws or acting up, and I do follow the news. While there might well be singular cases of criminality, small wonder if not, it's nothing like what I read about other nationalities, if nationality even fits with regard to the failed states other asylum seekers hail from.

 

I do not really care about the conversion bit, be Muslims all you want, as long as you don't bug other people, like another school buddy of mine who happens to be Moroccan and practising Muslim, but if everybody could be like most of them, taking that step, showing that sort of effort to secure a right to stay in any of our states, I would not be adverse to any number of people entering Germany. If anybody coming to Germany, refugee or not, could be like my school-buddy's daddy and father offspring like him, I would not be adverse to the present asylum business, but rather be honestly thrilled. Just, that is not the case, it's just what leftists want to force everybody to believe, even through criminal law, and it's just not the case or ever will be with what we are actually mostly getting right now.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Saradoc1972 said:

But this is not to the point. Schäuble's comment is on the behaviour of some Muslims (certainly not all, but it's endemic enough) towards the general majority non-Muslim populace.

 

That article you cited states: "In practice, she says, most Jewish women have civil divorces and are aware of their rights, so this act “is successful within the Jewish community”.

which is not the case in some Muslim communities. And if a given Jewish woman is fed up with the system, she can just get divorce anyway or not care, even do away with Judaism and all religion, if that is what she wishes. Might then have some social ramifications, but I have never heard of Jewish honour killings or going after apostates.

 

Besides, that used to be the same with the Catholic church up until 50 years ago, threatening eternal damnation on anyone even thinking divorce after having grudgingly accepted marriage to be a matter of civil courts. They are behaving even now a bit like that, at least in Germany. If you are employed in some kindergarten or hospital run by the catholic church and remarry after divorce, you might lose your job once they find out. They have wide leeway under the Art. 140 Basic Law and 137 Weimarer Reichsverfassung.

 

What we are seeing now is Muslim areas turning into no-go-zones, where you better wear a headscarf if female, or Muslim students spitting into other peoples' school meals in Ramadan. And that is where that comment comes in.

I referenced Jewish civil law for balance as religion based civil law (Sharia) was raised by another poster and not removed by Mod/s. I understand Sharia Civil law and Beth Din are also practised in Germany , but ultimately any such contracts would be subject to local country civil law in case of unresolved dispute, as in the UK.

 

People highlight unacceptable behaviour of some individuals , such as spitting in food, as a vehicle for generalised vilification, though I would guess such behaviour is very rare & not indicative of general practice of a group.

 

I do agree with  Schaeuble's observation in this OP, perhaps the messaging needs some massaging to be more focused towards those with criminal intent.

Edited by simple1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure it's prolly been mentioned here before but, I'll repeat it for emphasis:

The global elite have created the phony 'need' for Muslim refugee relocation (by virtue of their wars), and are using it as a tool -- a modern-day Trojan horse without the horse -- to systematically destroy Western civilizations, so they can bring in global gov't.

What is needed now are leaders of the Western world who will stand up to this evil cabal and come up with a way to provide the 'trojans' with an incentive to return to their countries of origin, or be relocated elsewhere.

What is NOT needed is a second Crusades, because too many innocent people will be killed and their countries might suffer considerable economic damage in the process.

For additional background on this, see rense.com

Edited by ballzafire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-04-13 at 8:18 AM, terryw said:

If a UK politician had said this about our 'peaceful law abiding' Muslims then he/she would now be in prison charged with hate crimes.

 

One of the many reasons why the UK has its identity and values

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, transam said:

They probably would go elsewhere but elsewhere ain't got cash handouts....:saai:

According to some polls about one third of all Muslims in Germany would leave, if they could take their welfare with them, to Turkey for example. Same in Austria, were up to 40% would leave for good if they got their social security contributions handed out plus perhaps some "bribe" of 20k, 50k, or 100k Euro, depending on individual impudence.

 

So, yeah, about right. But they obviously need their handouts because they are being so badly discriminated against. Or maybe it's that they don't seem to gravitate towards education and some 70% only get the lowest possible secondary education certificate, at best, which does not count for much. Better results in the conservative states, like Bavaria, which don't seem to get the hang of leftist school and social politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2017 at 8:12 PM, dick dasterdly said:

First time I've heard about Jewish civil courts.

 

Neither Jewish or Islamic civil courts should be allowed in christian countries.

The difference is these Rabbinical courts, Catholic Canon Law, Mormonism, all the rest is participation in Religious courts are totally voluntary. The worst thing that can happen is you get shunned from your respective communities. They cannot enforce any civil penalty or jail you or violate your rights under civil law. In America most Muslims have been doing quite well over the years education/income wise  they mostly came for education, work, escaping disasters such as 1980s Iran etc. Now the recent waves seem to be calling to enforce their beliefs on others against their will and this is fundamentally un-American.

 

We have always had  religious groups who live radically different lives than mainstream, wearing strange clothes  even sticking to old Dutch/German. They enjoy their freedom to live the way they want and don't push it on others. As long as they don't violate my rights I don't care if they "integrate" or not.

 

Unknown.jpeg

Edited by Dipterocarp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dipterocarp said:

The difference is these Rabbinical courts, Catholic Canon Law, Mormonism, all the rest is participation in Religious courts are totally voluntary. The worst thing that can happen is you get shunned from your respective communities. They cannot enforce any civil penalty or jail you or violate your rights under civil law. In America most Muslims have been doing quite well over the years education/income wise  they mostly came for education, work, escaping disasters such as 1980s Iran etc. Now the recent waves seem to be calling to enforce their beliefs on others against their will and this is fundamentally un-American.

 

We have always had  religious groups who live radically different lives than mainstream, wearing strange clothes  even sticking to old Dutch/German. They enjoy their freedom to live the way they want and don't push it on others. As long as they don't violate my rights I don't care if they "integrate" or not.

About nails it. Orthodox Jew can be strange to look on and don't generally intermarry with the majority population, but nobody in their right mind feels threatened by that or Kippas, Jarmulkes, Pejes, or odd socks. I suppose our Adolf did, but that was different. Or by the Amish, or by Sikhs. 

 

As to integration, Britain and the US have some 200k Turks each, but rather got the educated and hence more likely secular ones, for example, not the menial workers and their offspring Germany got for the most part, so far at least (which does mean some of those have not been doing great in Germany or at least OK). From what I hear, Muslims in the US are generally speaking better integrated as there is not that sort of welfare there, so they had to mingle with the general populace and learn the language to get jobs. Only heard of some problems in the rust belt, Dearborn in Michigan or where, where too large communities have formed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.









×
×
  • Create New...