RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270500/new-faces-dutch-anti-islam-front-bruce-bawer

These days in Europe, when you meet a stranger and let slip that you’re an American, you know beyond any doubt what the next question is going to be.

“Who did you vote for in the presidential election?” he asked. It was the other day, and I was in Amsterdam, and I had just sat down next to him at the bar and ordered a gin and tonic.

“Donald John Trump,” I said amiably.

“I’m impressed,” he said.

“By what?”

“When I ask other Americans that question, they get emotional. They act like I’ve attacked them. You’re the first who didn’t react like that.”

We were in a gay bar. “So are you talking about gay guys that you meet here?”

“Yes.”

“And they voted for Trump?”

“Some of them. Not all. The Hillary voters are proud. The Trump voters….”

“They’re defensive.”

“Yes.”

“Well, that’s understandable,” I said. “They’re used to being told that they voted for the incarnation of evil. I find it interesting that so many gay guys you meet did vote for Trump.”

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12552/turkey-erdogan-holy-war-obsession

When non-Muslims deny Muslim minorities the rights that Muslim-majority countries systematically deny non-Muslim minorities, extremist Muslims in Turkey seem to have the habit of threatening non-Muslim lands with holy war.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who spoke of “a war between the cross and the crescent” because the Austrian government closed down seven mosques, does not seem to bother with any of those visible, documented cases of religious discrimination against non-Muslims and against Islam’s minority sects.

Muslim leaders complain of travel bans on some Muslim nations, but many Muslim countries have travel bans against other Muslims in addition to banning Israelis.

When non-Muslims deny Muslim minorities the rights that Muslim-majority countries systematically deny non-Muslim minorities, extremist Muslims in Turkey seem to have the habit of threatening non-Muslim lands with holy war.

“Soon religious wars will break out in Europe. You are taking Europe toward an abyss. That’s the way it’s going,” Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s foreign minister, Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, predicted in a 2017 speech. The minister was angry with the European states that had banned Turkish Islamist political shows in their territories.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12558/switzerland-islam-radicalization

There are approximately 250 mosques in Switzerland, but the authorities do not know who finances them. By rejecting the proposal compelling mosques to disclose who finances them, the Swiss authorities can now remain willfully blind.

The Muslim World League is behind “a whole network of radically-oriented mosques in Switzerland… with the clear intention of spreading Salafist thought here”. — Saïda Keller-Messahli, expert on Islam in Switzerland.

Above all, the Swiss government seems not to have considered the rights of Swiss non-Muslim citizens, who are the ones left to live with the consequences of the government’s ill-thought-out policies.

Switzerland has just rejected a proposed law preventing mosques from accepting money from abroad, and compelling them to declare where their financial backing comes from and for what purpose the money will be used. According to the proposal, imams also would have been obliged to preach in one of the Swiss national languages.

While the proposal narrowly passed in the lower house of parliament already in September 2017, the upper house recently rejected it. The proposal was modeled on regulations in Austria, where already in 2015, a law banning foreign funding of religious groups was passed. The Austrian law aims to counter extremism by requiring imams to speak German, prohibiting foreign funding for mosques, imams and Muslim organizations in Austria, and stressing the precedence of Austrian law over Islamic sharia law for Muslims living in the country.

The Federal Council, which constitutes the federal government of Switzerland, was also against the proposal, and claimed that it constituted ‘discrimination’: “We must not discriminate against Muslim communities and imams and put them under general suspicion,” Justice Minister Simonetta Sommaruga said. The Federal Council noted that in Austria, Islam is officially recognized, whereas it is not in Switzerland. According to the Swiss government, therefore, the model applied in Austria does not apply to Switzerland, as “One cannot demand obligations without rights”. Instead, the Federal Council evidently believes that the risks posed by extremist Islamist preachers and communities can be combated within existing law.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/06/the_mullahs_and_hanging.html
The Iranian government is using execution as an instrument for spreading fear among its citizens.

“I am innocent and I had to confess under the torture.”

These are the last words of Mohammad Salas, who was executed by the Iranian regime authorities at dawn on June 18, 2018.

Mohammad Salas was a 51-year-old bus driver from one of Iran’s largest Sufi communities, the Nemattolah Gonabadi. He was arrested on February 19, 2018 while taking part in a protest against Sufi repression which turned violent after regime security forces resorted to beatings and the use of live ammunition, water cannons, and tear gas to disperse the crowd.

Accused of killing three policemen during the protests, Mohammad Salas’s attorney, Ms. Zaynab Taheri, stated several times that “We have many documents indicating Mohammad Salas is innocent.”

The sole piece of evidence used to convict him was a “confession” that Mohammad Salas said was forcibly extracted after he was severely beaten by police officers. He later retracted his “confession,” but the Supreme Court rejected his request for a judicial review.

In spite of an international campaign by human rights organizations, Amnesty International in particular, calling for Sala’s sentence to be dropped, it appears that the Iranian authorities have been more interested in vengeance at any cost than in justice.

There is an international organization whose members include the repressive regimes of Cuba, Venezuela and China.

This organization recently added the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which is obstructing an investigation into the murder within its borders of two United Nations human-rights experts.

In the past decade, this organization has passed more resolutions to condemn Israel specifically than to condemn Syria, Iran and North Korea combined.

Most people would not imagine that such an organization would be dedicated to protecting human rights. Yet all of these details describe the misnamed U.N. Human Rights Council. In truth, the council provides cover for governments with awful human-rights records, and it refuses to eliminate its Agenda Item 7, which targets Israel unfairly by mandating that each session include a discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

After more than a year of unsuccessful efforts to fix these fundamental defects, the U.S. delegation announced Tuesday our withdrawal from the council. Our country will no longer be party to this deeply flawed institution, which harms the cause of human rights more than it helps it.

There are two major reasons that so many countries have resisted U.S.-led reform efforts. The first is baked into the council’s composition. One look at this rogue’s gallery explains why the organization has such appalling disrespect for the rights Americans take for granted. A credible human-rights council would pose a threat to these countries, so they oppose the steps needed to create one. Instead they obstruct investigations and reports, while interfering with the council’s ability to name and shame the perpetrators of the world’s worst atrocities.