The majority of Swiss people and cantons reject the building of new minarets, Muslims remain incomprehending, as usual.

Identifies problem:
"Over the last two decades Islam has become connected to so many controversial debates – violence, extremism, freedom of speech, gender discrimination, forced marriage, to name a few – it is difficult for ordinary citizens to embrace this new Muslim presence as a positive factor."


But can't quite bring himself to take responsibility for the problem:
"Spread a sense of victimhood among the Swiss people: we are under siege, the Muslims are silently colonising us and we are losing our very roots and culture. This strategy worked."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/29/swiss-vote-ban-minarets-fear

Soren wrote on Nov 30^th, 2009 at 7:56am:

The majority of Swiss people and cantons reject the building of new minarets, Muslims remain incomprehending, as usual. Identifies problem: "Over the last two decades Islam has become connected to so many controversial debates – violence, extremism, freedom of speech, gender discrimination, forced marriage, to name a few – it is difficult for ordinary citizens to embrace this new Muslim presence as a positive factor." But can't quite bring himself to take responsibility for the problem: "Spread a sense of victimhood among the Swiss people: we are under siege, the Muslims are silently colonising us and we are losing our very roots and culture. This strategy worked." http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/29/swiss-vote-ban-minarets-fear

We [the 'West'] started 'losing' our 'roots and culture' decades ago.

Look at how we express [defend] our values, then look at the 'self belief' of moslem communities.

Moslems know what they believe in.

That is the difference between us.



To survive, a culture must have the confidence to assert its own unique values, and 'beliefs' [whether or not, those 'beliefs' are religious].

What do we believe in???

Do we believe in freedom, and TRUTH, and liberty, and justice?

Are you sure?






Q.
Should we [the West] fight, or resist, ISLAM?
OR,
Should we submit to ISLAM?

Let me simplify the Q. even further for you....

Should we submit to EVIL?

Err, do you know the correct answer?

IMO, it is very clear, that many people don't!



IN THE CONTEXT OF THESE QUESTIONS [above],
...i make this argument to you,

And i ask you this,
....why are so few people in Western nations willing to confront an evil philosophy like ISLAM?

And why has ISLAM been so successful at making inroads into Western nations, subverting non-moslem political and community institutions?

I myself will suggest an answer,

It is because moslems believe [in their moral position], and because we in the West [as a culture] don't believe,
....in anything!
....[except personal consumption, and pursuing our own personal pleasure.]

And for God's sake, woe betide anyone who confronts us, with our moral 'apostasy'!!

Dictionary,
apostasy = = the abandonment or renunciation of a belief *or principle*.

IMO, the trouble is that our 'values' and perceptions of right and wrong, of good and evil, have become so perverted, that in the name of 'tolerance', we are happy to embrace and protect the 'human rights' of ppl who, in any moral society would be regarded as criminals.


TRUTH

We are not a 'tolerant' culture.

Rather, we have become an evil culture and people, through our 'tolerance' of evil.
.....the 'tolerance' of evil in ourselves, and in those whom we have 'embraced'.

As i said, our perceptions of right and wrong, of good and evil, have become perverted.





"Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil."
Thomas Mann





I am quite sure, that we [the West] will not win this war [which ISLAM is waging against us], because we are an amoral people,
....and we don't care, that we are amoral.

Dictionary,
amoral = = lacking a moral sense; unconcerned whether something is right or wrong.

And, there are 3 reasons why we won't win this war with ISLAM,

1/ We hate the TRUTH.
2/ We hate the TRUTH.
3/ We hate the TRUTH.

Why can't we as a ppl understand those words, and that concept [about 'belief']?

People who hate TRUTH, end up destroying themselves - ALWAYS.

Muslim dentist loses discrimination suit
Published: 30 Nov 09 17:39 CET

A Muslim woman from Kista north of Stockholm who was denied a job as a dentist after refusing to wear short-sleeved work clothes for religious reasons has lost her discrimination case against the Swedish Public Dental Service (Folktandvården).

Following the completion of her dental studies in January 2008, the now 29-year-old woman applied for a position with the public dental service in Stockholm.

During the hiring process, she was informed that the dental agency requires personnel to wear short-sleeved gowns when treating patients.

But the rules, put in place for hygiene reasons, came into conflict with her Muslim faith, which requires that she show as little skin as possible in public.

Looking for a solution, she said she would be willing to wear disposable arm sleeves over a long-sleeved gown.

“We presented evidence from Socialstyrelsen (National Board of Health and Welfare) that showed that using these disposable arm sleeves has the same level of hygiene,” she said.

After Folktandvården rejected the compromise, she sued the dental service for 150,000 kronor ($21,500) in damages alleging the organization's refusal to accommodate her request to avoid short-sleeved work clothes amounted to discrimination.

But the Stockholm court sided with the dental service, finding that the decision not to hire the woman did not amount to discrimination.

In its ruling, the court cited health board regulations which recommend healthcare personnel use short-sleeved gowns when examining patients.

“Even it if means a disadvantaging of Muslims [...], Folktandvården is required to follow the current guidelines for basic hygiene for the healthcare system,” the court wrote in its judgment.

The court also ordered the woman to pay 250,000 kronor to cover the dental service’s court costs, something which she said is not going to be easy.

“It’s pretty unacceptable. I’m not working right now and have no income,” she said, adding that she is currently supported by her father.

The 29-year-old told The Local she is considering an appeal, but has yet to make up her mind.


http://www.thelocal.se/23572/20091130/

Yep real smart. Marginalising even more people, so of course they'll become more 'moderate' that way.  Perhaps thats the point isn't it? You actually like to see Muslims being pushed more towards extremism, because it brings about the clash you so desperately need.

Funny how when a woman is in Afghanistan, she has to be protected from discrimination and great lengths must be gone to, in order to ensure her equality, and to assist her to get the chance for an education and out of the home to work... but not in Stockholm!! No way!

abu_rashid wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2009 at 10:13pm:

Yep real smart. Marginalising even more people, so of course they'll become more 'moderate' that way.  Perhaps thats the point isn't it? You actually like to see Muslims being pushed more towards extremism, because it brings about the clash you so desperately need. Funny how when a woman is in Afghanistan, she has to be protected from discrimination and great lengths must be gone to, in order to ensure her equality, and to assist her to get the chance for an education and out of the home to work... but not in Stockholm!! No way!

She can always go an practice in Afghanistan. Huge call for lady dentists there...

Or Switzerland. Apparently they like Muslims who simply can't accept the rules of the country they find themselves in.

It is soooo obviously islamophobia, isn't it, Comical Abu. The judgement says it so plainly:
In its ruling, the court cited health board regulations which recommend healthcare personnel use short-sleeved gowns when examining patients.

“Even it if means a disadvantaging of Muslims [...], Folktandvården is required to follow the current guidelines for basic hygiene for the healthcare system,” the court wrote in its judgment.

Musta been jewish judges. It's a global conspiracy.

She agreed to wear arm coverings. It's quite clearly a case of trying to hassle Muslims.

Stop urinating down your own back and calling it rain.

abu_rashid wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2009 at 10:56pm:

She agreed to wear arm coverings. It's quite clearly a case of trying to hassle Muslims. Stop urinating down your own back and calling it rain.

The wit and wisdom of the desert.... Very amusing. Just like Muslim science - where the call for bare arms is met by wearing long sleeves.

And you guys are wondering 'why do they hate us so much?" Because you are so eyewateringly thick, for starters. And then you insist on being thick. You are ostentatiously thick.

Quote:

Yep real smart. Marginalising even more people, so of course they'll become more 'moderate' that way.  Perhaps thats the point isn't it? You actually like to see Muslims being pushed more towards extremism, because it brings about the clash you so desperately need.

-Abu

Quite a display of the muslim mindset Abu.
It is also why people describe you as an apologist and symapthiser for radical loons who promote terror to try and impose their standards onto everyone.

What you are effectively saying is, that you either give all muslims, whatever they want, whenever they want, or they will then have justification to join the terrorists, and come blow you up.
This ever present threat of violence, is actually something that muslims enjoy using, to add weight to their claims, which only lowers any respect for them from decent caring people, who give everyone a fair go.

abu_rashid wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2009 at 10:13pm:

Yep real smart. Marginalising even more people, so of course they'll become more 'moderate' that way.

Nobody is marginalising this person abu.

She has decided, herself, to 'marginalise' herself, and to reject the norms of the society and culture, in which she lives.

She is saying, in effect,
"Your cultural norms do not apply to me, and to people like myself, moslems.
And YOUR laws and values should, and must, change to 'accommodate' the cultural norms and values of people like myself."



What happened, is that after the rejection of her 'cultural' demands, this woman then determined, herself, to portray her own intransigence, as being the 'discrimination' of others.

What she did was to try to 'cleverly' 'PROJECT' her own cultural intransigence [wickedness], as being the 'discrimination' of others.

This moslem woman [LIKE ALL 'GOOD' MOSLEMS], is a cultural bigot!

A real bigot.




I also find it very, very, pleasing that the authorities within Sweden have decided to apply costs for this woman's irrational, illogical, and malicious litigation.



Soren wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2009 at 8:23pm:

Muslim dentist loses discrimination suit Published: 30 Nov 09 17:39 CET ..... In its ruling, the court cited health board regulations which recommend healthcare personnel use short-sleeved gowns when examining patients. “Even it if means a disadvantaging of Muslims [...], Folktandvården is required to follow the current guidelines for basic hygiene for the healthcare system,” the court wrote in its judgment. The court also ordered the woman to pay 250,000 kronor to cover the dental service’s court costs, something which she said is not going to be easy.

If i had my way, and if it can be reasonably demonstrated that this legal action, by this person, was an example of 'vexatious litigation', and if this person can't find the money [i.e. if she refuses] to reimburse 'the dental service’s court costs', then this person would be publicly flogged as punishment for her malicious litigation.

Dictionary,
vexatious = =
1 causing annoyance or worry.
2 Law (of an action) brought without sufficient grounds for winning, purely to cause annoyance to the defendant.

Yadda wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2009 at 9:18am:

This moslem woman [LIKE ALL 'GOOD' MOSLEMS], is a cultural bigot ! A real bigot.

Open a dictionary,
bigot = = a person who is prejudiced in their views and intolerant of the opinions of others.


Moslems are intolerant of all things un-ISLAMIC.

Moslems where they can, will insist that ISLAMIC values and norms should apply to themselves, and that expecting moslems to accept our cultural norms, AND OUR LAWS, is 'discrimination' against moslems.



TRUTH

This is nothing more than the manufacture of their moslem 'victimhood', in the moslem pursuit of their intended cultural domination, by ISLAM / Sharia of non-moslem nations.

This is ALL part of the surreptitious application of the JIHAD [the moslem 'struggle'] to bring 'Allah's way', upon other people.

I think that his has been called elsewhere, a war using 'Salami tactics'.

A cultural war of attrition, 'slice by slice'.


Dictionary,
attrition = =
1 the action or process of gradually wearing down through sustained attack or pressure.
2 wearing away by friction.

really you people exhibit nothing but pure arrogance. She was quite willing to meet the requirements, whilst still remaining true to her beliefs.

Yadda, this is precisely what you covet isn't it? That the followers of your own religion be sincere and willing to sacrifice for their staunch adherence to their beliefs. That is why you are so upset about this, because you are envious. Rather than followers of your own religion just being misguided... perhaps you're just misguided to the wrong religion?

You said it Abu, "HER BELIEFS".
Now you go on to say that society must accommodate her beliefs, because they are dressed up and called a religion, and the whole point here was that she knew, upfront, what the requirements were, but chose to ignore that, and demand the requirements be changed, to suit HER BELIEFS.
It is great that secular society is standing up to crazy religious beliefs, we do not want your beliefs imposing themselves onto the rest of us, and if you do not like that, stay out of secular society, isolate yourselves even further, and you can keep your silly club rules, because we do not want to know about them, let alone be coerced into accepting them.

What next, a voodoo dentist demanding the right to bite a chooks head off at the start of each appointment, if it suits his beliefs?

It is high time that muslims began respecting the beliefs and customs of the socieities they choose to come and live in, you know the ones, SECULAR societies.
We like them that way, so keep your beliefs in your church, and your homes, when you are mixing in a secular society, then accept it's beliefs, especially the belief that they do not have to accommodate every whacked out belief of every whacked out religious extremist.

mozzaok wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2009 at 11:01am:

You said it Abu, "HER BELIEFS". Now you go on to say that society must accommodate her beliefs, because they are dressed up and called a religion, and the whole point here was that she knew, upfront, what the requirements were, but chose to ignore that, and demand the requirements be changed, to suit HER BELIEFS. It is great that secular society is standing up to crazy religious beliefs,

Thank you for that moz.        :)





Quote:

....we do not want your beliefs imposing themselves onto the rest of us, and if you do not like that, stay out of secular society, isolate yourselves even further, and you can keep your silly club rules, because we do not want to know about them, let alone be coerced into accepting them. What next, a voodoo dentist demanding the right to bite a chooks head off at the start of each appointment, if it suits his beliefs? It is high time that muslims began respecting the beliefs and customs of the socieities they choose to come and live in, you know the ones, SECULAR societies. We like them that way, so keep your beliefs in your church, and your homes, when you are mixing in a secular society, then accept it's beliefs, especially the belief that they do not have to accommodate every whacked out belief of every whacked out religious extremist.

"...It is high time that muslims began respecting the beliefs and customs of the societies they choose to come and live in,..."



abu,

People in the world today, choose to migrate for many and varied reasons.

Very often the reason for migration to another country, is an 'economic' one.

But sometimes the reason for migration can be a 'cultural' reason.



And i would suggest, that if this moslem woman, living in Sweden, feels that she is being 'discriminated' against [because she is required to respect and obey the laws and customs of her country of residence], then she [and / or, her family] has an option open to every one of us.....

i.e.
She could choose, to migrate to a country which more nearly, practices her cultural beliefs.

If such people ['good' moslems], find our laws and customs, and freedoms, 'offensive', they can choose to migrate to a moslem 'paradise'.

Countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Somalia, come to mind.

There must be at least one, friendly, welcoming, moslem country which she would rather live in, which would accept her?

After all, the supposed hospitality of the moslem culture is legend!




abu,

When non-moslems must travel to, and live in, moslem countries, THEY, are expected to respect local laws and customs.

Q.
Why can't the hypocritical moslems be expected to apply the same 'sensitivity' and 'reasonableness', when moslems travel to, and live in, non-moslem, secular countries???

A.
Because ALL good moslems are cultural BIGOTS, and raging HYPOCRITES!



Dictionary,
hypocrisy = = the practice of claiming to have higher standards or beliefs than is the case.

so mozza, let's assume you have some kind of morals/principles. And you want to go for a job, and they want you to compromise them... you offer a solution which could quite easily satisfy both sides, and they reject. Is that fair? Are you trying to force your beliefs on them? Not really, you just want your job to not ask you to compromise your principles. Is that really so horrible of her?

My guess is you, like most others here, are viewing this with the specific religion of that girl in mind. Your disdain for Islam is what's driving your arrogrant approach.

How do you know she's an immigrant? Like me, she may well be a native who converted to Islam. The constant attempts to paint all issues with Muslims in terms of immigrants coming to force their foreign ways onto a host nation which so graciously offers them refuge are just ridiculous really. They indicate you've really got no decent argument worth expounding upon, so you attach it to the old "immigrants are swamping us" one.

Yadda spoke,


Yadda wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2009 at 1:02pm:

A. Because ALL good moslems are cultural BIGOTS, and raging HYPOCRITES! Dictionary, hypocrisy = = the practice of claiming to have higher standards or beliefs than is the case.

From an EX-moslem woman, speaking of the philosophy which she abandoned....


February 05, 2005
Muslim apostates cast out and at risk from faith and family...

...“They are such hypocrites — they want us to be tolerant of everything they want, but they are intolerant of everything about us.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article510589.ece




If it was upto me, i would exile all those who claimed to be moslems.

By their own mouth, they do not want freedom, they do not deserve freedom.




http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41295000/jpg/_41295952_protest203x300.jpg
"Freedom go to Hell"





http://openparachute.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/freedom-of-expression-go-to-hell.jpg
"Freedom OF EXPRESSION, go to Hell"




http://www.zionism-israel.com/ezine/Isllam2.jpg
ISLAM's method - TERROR

Political 'ideals', in the minds of religious bigots,

"Slay those who insult Islam"
"Behead those who insult Islam"
"Massacre those who insult Islam"
"Butcher those who mock Islam"
"Europe you will pay, demolition is on its way"
"Europe you will pay, extermination is on its way"
"Exterminate those who slander Islam"
"Europe is the cancer, Islam is the answer"
"Islam will dominate the world"
"Freedom go to hell"
"Europe take some lessons from 9/11"
"Be prepared for the real Holocaust"
"BBC = British Blasphemic Crusaders"







http://www.zionism-israel.com/ezine/Isllam4.jpg
Europe is a cancer, ISLAM is the answer???





http://www.middle-east-info.org/gateway/islamvsinfidels/IslamicHolyWar.jpg
TRUTH - from the mouth of a religious bigot.



THESE, are the people, this is the philosophy, which our leaders PANDER to!



Dictionary,
pander = = (pander to) gratify or indulge (an immoral or distasteful desire or habit).

abu_rashid wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2009 at 1:09pm:

How do you know she's an immigrant? Like me, she may well be a native who converted to Islam. The constant attempts to paint all issues with Muslims in terms of immigrants coming to force their foreign ways onto a host nation which so graciously offers them refuge are just ridiculous really. They indicate you've really got no decent argument worth expounding upon, so you attach it to the old "immigrants are swamping us" one.

abu,

It does not matter.

ISLAM is a philosophy which is incompatible with freedom, and the rights of expression, which we aspire to in our lives,
...and which our forefathers have fought for, and 'gifted' to us.

If you, or she, wish to live your 'religion', if you, or she, find it is 'offensive' to your 'sensibilities' to obey and live by our laws and our customs,
THEN YOU MAY FIND IT MORE AMENABLE TO YOUR PREFERRED LIFESTYLE, TO MIGRATE TO A COUNTRY WHICH FOLLOWS YOUR EVIL, EVIL, PHILOSOPHY OF DEATH, AND FALSEHOOD, AND LIES.



Go!

'Enjoy' your ISLAMIC lifestyle, in an ISLAMIC 'paradise'!

Yadda wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2009 at 1:37pm:

If it was upto me, i would exile all those who claimed to be moslems. By their own mouth, they do not want freedom, they do not deserve freedom.

Moslems deserve, ISLAM!


And they are welcome to it!

Quote:

so mozza, let's assume you have some kind of morals/principles

-Abu

Why would you assume that?
You know I am an atheist.
You know I think that your belief system is a man made invention, and even worse, made up by a man of extremely troubling sexual proclivities.
Would it not be fairer to admit that because I hold those beliefs you, and your religion would characterise me as being immoral, and without principles?

A position I also would strongly disagree with. ;)

The point was that she was trying to have the status quo changed, by deliberately refusing to accept pre-arranged requirements.
This is just a further attempt to have religious foolishness treated with a respect it has neither earned, or deserves.
Plenty of people have weird beliefs, but society is not bound to accommodate them, merely because someone contends they are for religious reasons.
Muslims use religious reasons to bury young girls up to their necks, and then hurl rocks at them until they are dead, for "moral" reasons, so excuse me when I scoff at any muslim even daring to attempt to ever claim any moral superiority over secular western cultures.

mozza, you're not getting the point here. Forget Islam, forget religion.

Do you have morals/principles that you believe in and don't think you'd compromise for a job?

abu_rashid wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2009 at 5:46pm:

Forget Islam, forget religion.

It is always Mohammedans who will not let you do that.

If you want to be a cocktail waitress, you have to dress like one. if you want to be a dentist, you have to dress like one. If you want to be a hairdresser, you have to dress like one. If you want to be a schoolgir in Paris, you have to dress like one.
It is only Mohammedans who don't get it.

They come across as ostentatiously thick  - don't they understand the simplest thing? - but in fact they are arrogant and would not submit to the the indignity of non-Muslim rules. Every single act by a Mohammedan in a western country , insofar as it is done as a Mohammedan, is a political act of challenge.
We know it, they know it.

If only we could forget Islam, forget religion. You simply do not let us.

Men who force wives to wear Burka 'not welcome in France'

Muslim men who force their wives to wear the full Islamic veil should not be granted French citizenship, Justice Minister Michele Alliot-Marie said on Thursday.
Wading into the debate over whether to ban the burka, Mme Alliot-Marie said the government would await the recommendations of a parliamentary panel considering possible legislation to bar Muslim women from wearing the full veil.
But the minister went on to say that "there are a certain number of basics on which we must stand firm".
"For instance, someone who would be seeking French citizenship and whose wife wears the full veil is someone who would not appear to be sharing the values of our country," she told LCI television.
"Therefore in a case like that one, we would reject his request," she said.
The justice minister said the wearing of the niqab or burka was a "problem that affects our ability to live together, the values of the republic and in particular human dignity."
The panel of 32 lawmakers from across the political spectrum are to hand in their much-awaited report on whether to ban the burka next month.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/6784057/Men-who-force-wives-to-wear-Burka-not-welcome-in-France.html

From Earth Times
An outspoken German professor of Islam, whose initial appointment angered Muslim groups, has renounced the faith, the University of Muenster said on Wednesday.

Muhammad Kalisch, who converted to Islam as a teenager, chairs one of the few departments at a German university dedicated to training teachers of Islam in schools. The university did not disclose why Kalisch renounced Islam.

"From the perspective of the university, this will not carry consequences," a spokesman told the German Press Agency dpa.He added that it is not crucial for a professor of Islam to be a Muslim. The university would not confirm whether Kalisch intended to stay in his post.

Kalisch, 44, upset the Muslim community in 2008 by writing that there was no historical evidence of the Prophet Mohammed's existence, prompting Muslim organizations to warn students away from him.

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/27166

Ah, the Muslim love fest goes on.

Let them wear slippers, I say.

Quote:

An outspoken German professor of Islam, whose initial appointment angered Muslim groups, has renounced the faith... ...Kalisch, 44, upset the Muslim community in 2008 by writing that there was no historical evidence of the Prophet Mohammed's existence, prompting Muslim organizations to warn students away from him.

Was he actually Muslim? I don't think so. Half of the Shehadeh is bearing witness to the existence of Muhammad (pbuh).

abu_rashid wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2010 at 8:58pm:

Quote: An outspoken German professor of Islam, whose initial appointment angered Muslim groups, has renounced the faith... ...Kalisch, 44, upset the Muslim community in 2008 by writing that there was no historical evidence of the Prophet Mohammed's existence, prompting Muslim organizations to warn students away from him. Was he actually Muslim? I don't think so. Half of the Shehadeh is bearing witness to the existence of Muhammad (pbuh).

he did the shalalala-do-bi-do so he musta been.

'Muhammad' Kalisch - not his birth name.

Ten controversial advertisements by an anti-Muslim group that were removed from Miami-Dade Transit buses after the department received complaints will go back up. The ads, which a transit official said were pulled last week because they ``may be offensive,' have the message ``Fatwa on your head? Is your community or family threatening you? Leaving Islam? Got questions? Get answers!' and direct Muslims to a website urging them to leave the ``falsity of Islam.'

Sanity prevails (just) - Msulims sue.

From the Local in Sweden:
http://www.thelocal.se/26528/20100508/

A law firm is suing the Swedish state for discrimination after one if its lawyers, a Muslim woman, was removed from a case following a complaint from a Christian asylum seeker.

The woman's employer, Salmi & Partners, was outraged after the Supreme Migration Court ruled on Thursday to have the woman taken off the case.

"It's just pure discrimination. We're going to demand 100,000 kronor ($13,000) from the state for this violation," said Ismo Salmi at the firm.

Salmi & Partenrs has also vowed to request leave from the Supreme Administrative Court to appeal the verdict.

The lawyer at the centre of the row was appointed last autumn by the Migration Board to represent an Egyptian man seeking asylum in Sweden. The man, a Christian, said he and his family were seeking asylum on grounds of persecution by Muslims in their home country.

On realising that his legal counsel was to be a Muslim woman, the man asked to be assigned a different lawyer.

The Migration Board refused his request, arguing that the lawyer's religion did not constitute sufficient grounds for a switch. The man then turned to the Migration Court of Appeal, where he stated that he did not trust his lawyer, a veil-wearing Muslim woman, to best represent his interests.

The appeals court however reached the same conclusion as the Migration Board and declined to allow the asylum seeker the right to be assigned a new lawyer.

But the Egyptian man appealed again. This time, the Supreme Migration Court ruled in his favour, giving him the right to be assigned a lawyer who was not a Muslim.

Explaining its verdict, the court wrote that the man's grounds for seeking asylum were such that "his reaction to the situation is understandable."

At Salmi & Partners, Ismo Salmi said if the ruling were allowed to stand there was a serious risk that other law firms would think twice about employing lawyers who wore Muslim veils, as to do so might reduce their chances of getting work from the Migration Board.

"It's unbelievable that a superior court in Sweden can make a ruling like this. It's an incredible violation," he said.

the customers always right.

if they don't wanna be represented by a letterbox lady, they don't have to .

It seems pretty silly to provide him with a Muslim lawyer in the first place. I don't necessarily think the lawyer wouldn't have done her best, but if the asylum seeker has suffered persecution from Muslims because he is a Copt, then it stands to reason that he'd be traumatised by and distrustful of a Muslim lawyer. Particularly one who (by wearing the scarf) appears to be religious.

Sprint, the migration board is the 'customer'. They appointed the lawyer - are they still always right?

Annie Anthrax wrote on May 12^th, 2010 at 2:03pm:

It seems pretty silly to provide him with a Muslim lawyer in the first place. I don't necessarily think the lawyer wouldn't have done her best, but if the asylum seeker has suffered persecution from Muslims because he is a Copt, then it stands to reason that he'd be traumatised by and distrustful of a Muslim lawyer. Particularly one who (by wearing the scarf) appears to be religious.

Especially when, as  one of the commenters to the article on the Swedish cite claims, that the female Muslim lawyer is Cherin Awad, who previously gained fame on a Sveriges Television (SVT) program ("Halal-TV") for refusing to shake hands with newspaper columnist and filthy kufir Carl Hamilton, and for calling for the stoning to death of women who committed adultery.

Geert Wilders to enter Dutch government after support for anti-Islamic party triples

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/netherlands/7818281/Geert-Wilders-to-enter-Dutch-government-after-support-for-anti-Islamic-party-triples.html

I think the success is clearly due to the May 20 'everyone draw Mohammed' day, don't you, Lestat? Two weeks later, Geert's numbers triple. No-one can deny the obvious and strong causal link.

Thank you to all who submitted drawings.

Happy belated 'Everybody draw Mohammed Day !" (20 May)

To our Muslim friends especially, but all other group-think numpties may also hug each other and repeat after Mohammed:

http://thepeoplescube.com/images/mohammed/Maksim_Mohammed_Iwantyou.png

I hope you are all feeling better.




Now back to your wicked, wicked ways.