'hijab' wearing 'muslim' women in 'congress'

[irosie91]

Why would you care how they dressed?

Because there is a deeper meaning to the dress. If Jews wearing beanies started bombing places outside of Israel and calling for the death of infidels. I would renounce Judaism and never wear a beanie again. But thats just me.

Hmm, so there's been no Beanie wearing Jewish Terrorists?

So, Baruch Goldstein is just a figment of our imaginations?

Not one or two. There are always psychos. I mean many many many many persons as happens in radical Islam. Nice try though.

Islamic Tatars are model Muslims, as they tend to be more Secular & Educated, they also have a lot less Terrorist attacks than Jews, or most of the Western European ethnics.

And? You're not making a strong argument at all here. You hate Jews and want me and all my kind eradicated. I get it. Doesn't mean you have to defend radical Islam in the process.

the islamo Nazi literature is, very much, a collaboration between Christians
like Sobie and muslims. Muslim learn that literature BY ROTE in school

 

[bodecea]

Are you? I am not so sure when it comes to radical Islam. I would not bet my or my kids lives on it that is for sure. Again being a Jew maybe I am more sensitive than most when it comes to radical Islam or Islam in general.

But as with radical christians or jewish people, the radicals in islam are the minority.

You don't know this woman. Just because she wears a head scarf and is a muslim you're assuming she's a radical.

So using your standards even though it's the minority, all christians and jewish people are radical extremists and should be judged that way. No exceptions. Without any proof. Just as you're doing with this muslim woman.

I so want to believe you're not an extremist christian but you know, a small minority of christians are so all must be and since you're a christian, you are too.

She supports BDS and basically called Israel a spawn of Satan.

I would need proof of that and if she did so what?

I read posts everyday on this site from conservatives calling everyone who doesn't agree with them satan or the spawn of satan or evil or going to hell etc.

So it's ok for republicans to say that about their fellow Americans?

Notice they lean on their so-called religion of peace to do that....they want sharia themselves, just christian sharia.

I am Jewish. No Jewish Sharia.

With Election Now Over, Ilhan Omar Voices BDS Support | TC Jewfolk
https://nypost.com/2018/11/11/heres-the-anti-semitism-the-media-doesnt-want-to-mention/
Ilhan Omar, who once called Israel an 'apartheid regime,' wins congressional primary in Minnesota - Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Thanks to our Constitution and secular laws....

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

But as with radical christians or jewish people, the radicals in islam are the minority.

You don't know this woman. Just because she wears a head scarf and is a muslim you're assuming she's a radical.

So using your standards even though it's the minority, all christians and jewish people are radical extremists and should be judged that way. No exceptions. Without any proof. Just as you're doing with this muslim woman.

I so want to believe you're not an extremist christian but you know, a small minority of christians are so all must be and since you're a christian, you are too.

She supports BDS and basically called Israel a spawn of Satan.

I would need proof of that and if she did so what?

I read posts everyday on this site from conservatives calling everyone who doesn't agree with them satan or the spawn of satan or evil or going to hell etc.

So it's ok for republicans to say that about their fellow Americans?

Notice they lean on their so-called religion of peace to do that....they want sharia themselves, just christian sharia.

I am Jewish. No Jewish Sharia.

With Election Now Over, Ilhan Omar Voices BDS Support | TC Jewfolk
https://nypost.com/2018/11/11/heres-the-anti-semitism-the-media-doesnt-want-to-mention/
Ilhan Omar, who once called Israel an 'apartheid regime,' wins congressional primary in Minnesota - Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Thanks to our Constitution and secular laws....

You're moving the goal posts. My point is that the newly elected rep from MN is an anti semite. Period. End of Story.

 

[bodecea]

She supports BDS and basically called Israel a spawn of Satan.

I would need proof of that and if she did so what?

I read posts everyday on this site from conservatives calling everyone who doesn't agree with them satan or the spawn of satan or evil or going to hell etc.

So it's ok for republicans to say that about their fellow Americans?

Notice they lean on their so-called religion of peace to do that....they want sharia themselves, just christian sharia.

I am Jewish. No Jewish Sharia.

With Election Now Over, Ilhan Omar Voices BDS Support | TC Jewfolk
https://nypost.com/2018/11/11/heres-the-anti-semitism-the-media-doesnt-want-to-mention/
Ilhan Omar, who once called Israel an 'apartheid regime,' wins congressional primary in Minnesota - Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Thanks to our Constitution and secular laws....

You're moving the goal posts. My point is that the newly elected rep from MN is an anti semite. Period. End of Story.

By calling Israel an "apartheid regime", does that make one automatically an anti-semite?

 

[irosie91]

I would need proof of that and if she did so what?

I read posts everyday on this site from conservatives calling everyone who doesn't agree with them satan or the spawn of satan or evil or going to hell etc.

So it's ok for republicans to say that about their fellow Americans?

Notice they lean on their so-called religion of peace to do that....they want sharia themselves, just christian sharia.

I am Jewish. No Jewish Sharia.

With Election Now Over, Ilhan Omar Voices BDS Support | TC Jewfolk
https://nypost.com/2018/11/11/heres-the-anti-semitism-the-media-doesnt-want-to-mention/
Ilhan Omar, who once called Israel an 'apartheid regime,' wins congressional primary in Minnesota - Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Thanks to our Constitution and secular laws....

You're moving the goal posts. My point is that the newly elected rep from MN is an anti semite. Period. End of Story.

By calling Israel an "apartheid regime", does that make one automatically an anti-semite?

It makes one a parrot of islamo-Nazi shit propaganda ---Her statement
indicates that she is a mindless muslimah bitch

 

[Coyote]

you immigration loving guys and girls are getting the change you want . --- https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/no_sharia_in_america.html ---

Just more of the filthy same as America loses more of its identity, it’s roots....the identity that once upon a time made it the greatest country in the world.

Don't really get that, since New England was largely founded by religious extremists following ancient Mideast religious practices, which originally required hair covering for women, like the Puritans, Quakers, etc.

You won’t “get” much if you like to split hairs and play retard semantics. You probably haven’t noticed but WE haven’t made ‘head coverings’ part of the standard dress code for about a century now. You’re trying hard though...that’s cute.

So? What gives you men the right to decide what women should or should not wear? You dont have the the right to tell us we must cover our hair and you dont have the to tell us we cannot.

 

[BrokeLoser]

you immigration loving guys and girls are getting the change you want . --- https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/no_sharia_in_america.html ---

Just more of the filthy same as America loses more of its identity, it’s roots....the identity that once upon a time made it the greatest country in the world.

Don't really get that, since New England was largely founded by religious extremists following ancient Mideast religious practices, which originally required hair covering for women, like the Puritans, Quakers, etc.

You won’t “get” much if you like to split hairs and play retard semantics. You probably haven’t noticed but WE haven’t made ‘head coverings’ part of the standard dress code for about a century now. You’re trying hard though...that’s cute.

So? What gives you men the right to decide what women should or should not wear? You dont have the the right to tell us we must cover our hair and you dont have the to tell us we cannot.

Haha...straight up Feminazi huh?

 

[Coyote]

Does her Husband/Brother force her to wear the head-cover?
It is a display of Islamic Male chauvinism and Islamic Female subservience.
It proves once again that Liberals don't have any real principles.
The crazy Liberals are kowtowing to the Jihadist again.

View attachment 238242

 

[Coyote]

and from what i understand 'yamalkus' are also not allowed since the 180 year old rules was put in place 180 years ago . I guess that the rule was NO Head coverings / no hats and it wasn't a religious rule . But import these third worlders and now its a religious rule . As i said . import these third worlders and you will have to deal with their unamerican ways . --- https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/no_sharia_in_america.html ---

And it was never legal or right for Congress to ever have a rule dictating head covering.
It does not just violate many religious beliefs, but all personal and individual rights as well.
The only legal dress code one could demand is something that defends the rights of others, such as a ban on nudity.

I see nothing wrong with dress codes

I most certainly do when the dress code is arbitrary, lacking in uniformity, and serves no purpose except to harm selected minorities.
The only legal regulations are those necessary in order to defend the rights of others.
There is no authority for anything else.

And this case the dress code is from a century ago and the only reason they suddenly care is that she is a muslim.

Would toupe's violate the rule?

 

[pismoe]

you immigration loving guys and girls are getting the change you want . --- https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/no_sharia_in_america.html ---

Just more of the filthy same as America loses more of its identity, it’s roots....the identity that once upon a time made it the greatest country in the world.

Don't really get that, since New England was largely founded by religious extremists following ancient Mideast religious practices, which originally required hair covering for women, like the Puritans, Quakers, etc.

You won’t “get” much if you like to split hairs and play retard semantics. You probably haven’t noticed but WE haven’t made ‘head coverings’ part of the standard dress code for about a century now. You’re trying hard though...that’s cute.

So? What gives you men the right to decide what women should or should not wear? You dont have the the right to tell us we must cover our hair and you dont have the to tell us we cannot.

------------------------------------------------ yeah , straight up feminazi . They agree to no rules , not even 200 year old agreed to rules .

 

[irosie91]

Does her Husband/Brother force her to wear the head-cover?
It is a display of Islamic Male chauvinism and Islamic Female subservience.
It proves once again that Liberals don't have any real principles.
The crazy Liberals are kowtowing to the Jihadist again.

View attachment 238242

View attachment 238414 View attachment 238415 View attachment 238416

in the above examples of "head covering"---the people involved are following
accepted protocol for the given situation.

 

[pismoe]

and from what i understand 'yamalkus' are also not allowed since the 180 year old rules was put in place 180 years ago . I guess that the rule was NO Head coverings / no hats and it wasn't a religious rule . But import these third worlders and now its a religious rule . As i said . import these third worlders and you will have to deal with their unamerican ways . --- https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/no_sharia_in_america.html ---

And it was never legal or right for Congress to ever have a rule dictating head covering.
It does not just violate many religious beliefs, but all personal and individual rights as well.
The only legal dress code one could demand is something that defends the rights of others, such as a ban on nudity.

I see nothing wrong with dress codes

I most certainly do when the dress code is arbitrary, lacking in uniformity, and serves no purpose except to harm selected minorities.
The only legal regulations are those necessary in order to defend the rights of others.
There is no authority for anything else.

And this case the dress code is from a century ago and the only reason they suddenly care is that she is a muslim.

Would toupe's violate the rule?

-------------------------------------- yep agree , she is muslim and her head covering is a statement of 'islam' and thats the only reason i care and find the issue to be interesting Coyote .

 

[irosie91]

and from what i understand 'yamalkus' are also not allowed since the 180 year old rules was put in place 180 years ago . I guess that the rule was NO Head coverings / no hats and it wasn't a religious rule . But import these third worlders and now its a religious rule . As i said . import these third worlders and you will have to deal with their unamerican ways . --- https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/no_sharia_in_america.html ---

And it was never legal or right for Congress to ever have a rule dictating head covering.
It does not just violate many religious beliefs, but all personal and individual rights as well.
The only legal dress code one could demand is something that defends the rights of others, such as a ban on nudity.

I see nothing wrong with dress codes

I most certainly do when the dress code is arbitrary, lacking in uniformity, and serves no purpose except to harm selected minorities.
The only legal regulations are those necessary in order to defend the rights of others.
There is no authority for anything else.

And this case the dress code is from a century ago and the only reason they suddenly care is that she is a muslim.

Would toupe's violate the rule?

the issue is forms of dress that are SPECIFIC to this or that
religious ideology-----not simply "covering the head" A toupe
covers the head but is NOT specific to any given religion----so it
is ok

 

[Coyote]

you immigration loving guys and girls are getting the change you want . --- https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/no_sharia_in_america.html ---

Just more of the filthy same as America loses more of its identity, it’s roots....the identity that once upon a time made it the greatest country in the world.

Don't really get that, since New England was largely founded by religious extremists following ancient Mideast religious practices, which originally required hair covering for women, like the Puritans, Quakers, etc.

You won’t “get” much if you like to split hairs and play retard semantics. You probably haven’t noticed but WE haven’t made ‘head coverings’ part of the standard dress code for about a century now. You’re trying hard though...that’s cute.

So? What gives you men the right to decide what women should or should not wear? You dont have the the right to tell us we must cover our hair and you dont have the to tell us we cannot.

------------------------------------------------ yeah , straight up feminazi . They agree to no rules , not even 200 year old agreed to rules .

So we should to dress codes of 200 years ago...or is this where you pick and choose?

 

[Coyote]

and from what i understand 'yamalkus' are also not allowed since the 180 year old rules was put in place 180 years ago . I guess that the rule was NO Head coverings / no hats and it wasn't a religious rule . But import these third worlders and now its a religious rule . As i said . import these third worlders and you will have to deal with their unamerican ways . --- https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/no_sharia_in_america.html ---

And it was never legal or right for Congress to ever have a rule dictating head covering.
It does not just violate many religious beliefs, but all personal and individual rights as well.
The only legal dress code one could demand is something that defends the rights of others, such as a ban on nudity.

I see nothing wrong with dress codes

I most certainly do when the dress code is arbitrary, lacking in uniformity, and serves no purpose except to harm selected minorities.
The only legal regulations are those necessary in order to defend the rights of others.
There is no authority for anything else.

And this case the dress code is from a century ago and the only reason they suddenly care is that she is a muslim.

Would toupe's violate the rule?

the issue is forms of dress that are SPECIFIC to this or that
religious ideology-----not simply "covering the head" A toupe
covers the head but is NOT specific to any given religion----so it
is ok

Actually no. It is not. Religion has nothing to with the reason that rule was made 181 years ago.

 

[Coyote]

and from what i understand 'yamalkus' are also not allowed since the 180 year old rules was put in place 180 years ago . I guess that the rule was NO Head coverings / no hats and it wasn't a religious rule . But import these third worlders and now its a religious rule . As i said . import these third worlders and you will have to deal with their unamerican ways . --- https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/no_sharia_in_america.html ---

And it was never legal or right for Congress to ever have a rule dictating head covering.
It does not just violate many religious beliefs, but all personal and individual rights as well.
The only legal dress code one could demand is something that defends the rights of others, such as a ban on nudity.

I see nothing wrong with dress codes

I most certainly do when the dress code is arbitrary, lacking in uniformity, and serves no purpose except to harm selected minorities.
The only legal regulations are those necessary in order to defend the rights of others.
There is no authority for anything else.

And this case the dress code is from a century ago and the only reason they suddenly care is that she is a muslim.

Would toupe's violate the rule?

-------------------------------------- yep agree , she is muslim and her head covering is a statement of 'islam' and thats the only reason i care and find the issue to be interesting Coyote .

so?

 

[Coyote]

Does her Husband/Brother force her to wear the head-cover?
It is a display of Islamic Male chauvinism and Islamic Female subservience.
It proves once again that Liberals don't have any real principles.
The crazy Liberals are kowtowing to the Jihadist again.

View attachment 238242

View attachment 238414 View attachment 238415 View attachment 238416

in the above examples of "head covering"---the people involved are following
accepted protocol for the given situation.

yet is is a pick and choose protocal. For example they do not choose to follow it with Islamic leaders.

 

[pismoe]

i'm not talking about the 200 year old rule which i think was made to take care of there being too many hats and no place to put them . Course the rule change is due to a muslim chick . -------------------- the 'muslim' chicks headcovering is a statement of 'islamic' supremacy Coyote ,

 

[Coyote]

Notice they lean on their so-called religion of peace to do that....they want sharia themselves, just christian sharia.

I am Jewish. No Jewish Sharia.

With Election Now Over, Ilhan Omar Voices BDS Support | TC Jewfolk
https://nypost.com/2018/11/11/heres-the-anti-semitism-the-media-doesnt-want-to-mention/
Ilhan Omar, who once called Israel an 'apartheid regime,' wins congressional primary in Minnesota - Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Thanks to our Constitution and secular laws....

You're moving the goal posts. My point is that the newly elected rep from MN is an anti semite. Period. End of Story.

By calling Israel an "apartheid regime", does that make one automatically an anti-semite?

It makes one a parrot of islamo-Nazi shit propaganda ---Her statement
indicates that she is a mindless muslimah bitch

So if Ivanka covers her hair in Israel is she a mindless Jewish bitch?

Trying to keep all these double standards straight is exhausting.

 

[Coyote]

i'm not talking about the 200 year old rule which i think was made to take care of there being too many hats and no place to put them . Course the rule change is due to a muslim chick . -------------------- the 'muslim' chicks headcovering is a statement of 'islamic' supremacy Coyote ,

oh my. So Muslims in America are required to hide their faith now?