Saturday, December 29, 2018

GERMAN FEDERAL SUPREME COURT REJECTS AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL A LAW BANNING CHILD MARRIAGE; ACCOMODATES SHARIA LAW

 GERMAN HIGH COURT BASTARDIZES LONG STANDING NATIONAL LAW TO ACCOMODATE SHARIA LAW 
REPEAT OF THIRD REICH LEGAL CORRUPTION
 https://static6.businessinsider.com/image/4e611c73eab8ea182a000002-1190-625/the-german-supreme-court-is-going-to-make-a-decision-that-will-make-the-obamacare-drama-look-like-childs-play.jpg
 https://d13n9ry8xcpemi.cloudfront.net/photo/odai/400/d032a1c24c03c7292f8263198da1f1d2_400.jpg
 https://i.ytimg.com/vi/WASSPjwYHkY/maxresdefault.jpg
 https://i.ytimg.com/vi/-j-1tvALJ7g/maxresdefault.jpg
 GERMAN FEDERAL SUPREME COURT REJECTS 
AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL A LAW BANNING 
CHILD MARRIAGE 
BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
 No Western country should bend its laws and abandon its principles in 
order to appease anyone or to suit any religious sensibilities at the 
expense of its women and girls. And yet this is not happening in Germany
 alone; many Western countries are increasingly 
adopting a two-tier legal system,  
allowing for a harmful accommodation of Sharia norms.
 
“German Supreme Court Rejects Anti-Child Marriage Law as Unconstitutional,” by Chris Tomlinson, Breitbart,December 26, 2018:
The German Federal Supreme Court has made a new ruling on a child marriage case which could have implications on the way child marriages conducted legally overseas are treated in the country.
The ruling comes from a case involving a Syrian man who was separated from his underage “wife” when the pair arrived in Germany as asylum seekers in August 2015, Die Welt reports.
The pair, cousins, were married in February 2015 while the man was aged 21 and the girl aged only 14 in a marriage procedure that was done under sharia legally in Syria but was considered invalid by German authorities where the marriage age was 16 at the time.
After his “wife” had been taken into separate care due to her status as a minor, the Syrian man complained to German courts which initially granted him weekend access to her with a district court claiming the marriage had not been forced.
The case was then sent up to the Federal Supreme Court which has now ruled that the marriage between the pair should be examined on the basis of its legal status in Syria. Such cases in the future should be looked at on an individual basis, the court said, instead of a blanket refusal to recognise them — as was the procedure previously.
In Germany, protection of marriage and family are enshrined in the Basic Law, as well as the principle of equal treatment, and both could be violated under the ban on child marriages…..
______________________________________________________________

 https://gatesofvienna.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/childbride2.jpg
 German Court Applies Sharia to Child Marriage
BY BARON BODISSEY 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
 
The following report from the German website Einwanderungskritik (Immigration Criticism) is all but unbelievable: a district court has cited sharia law to validate a Syrian immigrant’s marriage to a 14-year-old girl. An act that would land a native German man in prison for child molestation is being sanctioned by the court as a valid “marriage”, simply because it as recognized as such by Islamic law.
Many thanks to Nash Montana for the translation:
Scandalous judgment: Islamic pedophile-marriages are valid in Germany
“A marriage that has been performed according to Syrian law in Syria with a 14 year old bride and a man of legal age, has to be recognized as valid if the husband belongs to the Sunni religion and the marriage has already been executed.”
by Robin Classen
With mass immigration, not only terrorism in Paris and Brussels and the sex crimes on New Year’s eve came to Europe, but also very different social and moral values. For instance, Islam allows men to marry multiple women.
Extremely problematic: Mohammed married his “favorite woman” Aisha when she was just six years old. That is not an unusual Islamic opinion; this is widely uncontested knowledge in Sunni as well as in Shiite Islam. In Germany however, as part of sanctioned lying to advance the cause of Islam (taqiyya), those who ask critical questions are often told: Aisha was after all already 14 years old when she married the 50-year-old Mohammed. Even more common is the lie that around the year 700 children were a lot more sexually mature. That one cannot compare the nine-year-old Aisha therefore with a nine-year-old of today, that she was a complete woman. That all the focus on cleanliness and coddling in the modern world is what delays a girl’s menstruation more and more.
The opposite has been scientifically proven: In Germany in 1860 girls got their first period at the age of 16.6 years old. In 1920 they began to menstruate at 14.6 years old, in 1980 at 12.5 years old, and today even sooner yet. And all this of course completely independent of the fact that a first menstruation is only one step on the way to become an adult woman and it does not signify the ultimate end of childhood.
Forced marriage of children is completely okay in Islam
Since Mohammed was deemed to be an exemplary ideal and virtuous man, this moral assessment applies as well to his marriage with multiple women and the child Aisha, which is why forced marriages of children in Shiite as well as in Sunni Islam are entirely normal. Often children die on their wedding night due to fatal internal bleeding caused by their Muslim husbands. This behavior is now entering Germany.
Here’s the case of a 22-year-old Syrian man and his 14-year-old wife — probably a more benign example — a couple who came to Bavaria at the end of 2015. They are also cousins — since marriages among relatives, too, is a custom that is accepted in Islam, which has for centuries harmed the gene pool of the Islamic peoples. According to one BBC study 55 % of the Pakistanis living in Great Britain are married to relatives. And worldwide, half of all Muslims are living in incestuous marriages. The consequences are an average IQ that is 10 points lower, and a significantly higher risk for psychological and physical illnesses.
Youth welfare service unsuccessfully tried to protect the child from German justice
The two youths were separated immediately after their arrival in Germany: The Youth welfare office took the child into custody. The man then submitted a lawsuit — in all likelihood at taxpayer’s expense — and verified through a Syrian marriage certificate that he was effectively married to the child he according to Syrian law. The district court then reinterpreted the lawsuit which demanded that the child be handed over to the husband, and granted visitation rights to the “couple” so they could meet alone on the weekends. But the youth welfare office lodged an appeal, arguing that the “wife” is a child and acts like a child. That she is not in a position to lead an autonomous, self-determined life as a “wife”, and that there is the danger that the two have sexual intercourse on the weekends, which according to German law constitutes sexual abuse of a minor.

The subsequent decision of the OLG Bamberg (regional appeals court Bamberg) is simply mind-blowing: The OLG decided that international privacy rights have to be applied to the Syrian couple. During the trial the court had received a “crash course in Syrian marriage law” and had decided that the couple were effectively married. That even the German “Ordre Public”, the public policy doctrine, cannot stand in the way of this. If anyone would like to know what is possible concerning the Islamization of German law, they should read the resolution from May 5, 2015, file reference 2 UF 58/16 of the Regional Appeals Court of Bamberg.
OLG is exclusively applying Sharia law
One paragraph after another the judge cites openly and absent of all critique sharia law, which they then apply one-to-one. For the Bavarian judges, according to their own statements, it is therefore only important “whether the marriage of a Muslima with a non-Muslim is void”, since Islamic law prohibits such. In other words, if there were two refugees with a Syrian marriage certificate, and then it emerged that one of the two was a Christian, a German court would void the marriage, since a Muslim Herrenmensch (overlord) cannot be married to a Christian Untermensch (subhuman).
According to Syrian-Islamic marriage right there is a minimum marriage age of 13 years, but it is invalid if the wedding has already been performed. So therefore, there really is no law for a minimum age, but this seems to pose no problem for Bavarian judges. It seems more important to the court in Bamberg that the dowry was paid by the parents:
Apart from that, Article 51, section 2 of the PSG (strengthening of the care-giving act) on defective marriage contracts after cohabitation, decides, among other things, the obligation of paying the dowry, the obstacle of in-law relationship to marrying, and the obligation of observing the legal waiting period in cases of dissolution of marriage either by divorce or death. Therefore, Articles 47 to 52 PSG cannot be interpreted as a regulation to the effect that a defective marriage contract after cohabitation leads to a void marriage.
The child has to endure abuse so that “integration” is successful
After all this, the court came out with the real tear-jerker: The “husband and wife” had endured so much together already during their “flight”! Additionally, a recognition of their marriage for the purpose of integration is vital. The two had already rejected participation in integration courses long before their marriage was validated, the German judges seriously lamented.
The youth welfare office and parents do not play a role anymore for the court: The child is legally married and, according to Syrian law, parental responsibility has thereby lapsed. Punishability according to § 182 III StGB is swept under the rug by the OLG Bamberg: That counts as “a matter of interpretation”. The bottom line is that the higher regional court, as the second most highest civil rights entity, has applied sharia law, which thus with one swipe suspends German family law, and especially criminal law, and has therefore deprived a 14-year-old girl of all protection given to her by the youth welfare services, and instead has exposed her to her “husband” defenselessly.
The legal court documents about the case:
OLG Bamberg, Beschluss v. 12.05.2016 — 2 UF 58/16 — Bügerservice

GERMANY: ANGELA MERKEL SAYS NATION STATES MUST BE WILLING TO "GIVE UP THEIR SOVEREIGNTY"

 Angela Merkel: Nation States Must Be Willing to "Give Up Their Sovereignty"
GERMANY: ANGELA MERKEL SAYS NATION STATES MUST BE WILLING TO 
"GIVE UP THEIR SOVEREIGNTY"
 German Chancellor says people who complain 
about immigration should be ignored
BY PAUL JOSEPH WATSON
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
 
German Chancellor Angela Merkel told an audience in Berlin that “nation states should be willing to give up their sovereignty” and that governments shouldn’t listen to their own citizens on matters of immigration.
During an event aimed at combating populism entitled Parliamentarism in the Tension of Globalization and National Sovereignty, Merkel brazenly said that “nation-states should be willing to give up their sovereignty today” and this should be done via an “orderly process”.
Responding to critcism of the UN Migration Pact, which greases the skids for mass migration to be treated as a human right, Merkel said that international agreements took precedence over the will of the people within individual countries.
“There were [politicians] who believed that they could decide when these agreements are no longer valid because they are representing The People,” she said.
“[But] the people are individuals who are living in a country, they are not a group who define themselves as the [German] people,” she stressed.
Merkel’s forthright denunciation of sovereignty and her continued support for mass immigration comes despite both issues leading to a massive collapse in her own approval numbers.
Earlier this year, a YouGov survey also found that almost half of Germans want to leave their own country “for a more stable political situation”.
_____________________________________________________________
SEE ALSO:
https://www.infowars.com/hungary-official-mass-migration-dangerous-integration-failed/ 
 

APRIL GLASER OF SLATE BOASTS: YOUTUBE REMOVES PRO-LIFE TITLES FROM TOP "ABORTION" VIDEO SEARCHES AT HER LIBERAL INSISTENCE

 















 Far-left Slate reporter April Glaser boasted Friday that she forced YouTube to censor pro-life videos on their platform and replace them with pro-abortion videos instead.
 Leftist Slate reporter boasts she forced YouTube to remove anti-abortion videos from the platform
YOUTUBE REMOVES PRO-LIFE TITLES FROM 
TOP "ABORTION" VIDEO SEARCHES
BY DAVE BOHON
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
 
YouTube appears to have cleaned out pro-life videos from the top choices under the search word “abortion.” What’s more, a writer for the left-leaning Slate.com suggested that she was responsible for the change.
April Glaser, identified as a Slate technology reporter, wrote that “before I raised the issue with YouTube ... the top search results for ‘abortion’ on the site were almost all anti-abortion” — meaning they were pro-life in perspective.
One of the previously top-ranking titles apparently unranked through Glaser’s efforts is called “LIVE Abortion Video on Display,” which is nothing less than a horrifyingly true video representation of what happens when a pre-born baby’s life is ended through abortion. While the graphic nature of the two-minute video prevented Glaser from challenging the veracity of its deeply disturbing content, she claimed that many other top-ranking pro-life videos she viewed were “frequently misleading” — a charge she made without qualification.
“Only two of the top 15 results struck me as not particularly political,” she wrote, “and none of the top results focused on providing dispassionate, up-to-date medical information.”
Glaser related that after e-mailing YouTube to ask why pro-life videos dominated its search results for “abortion,” over the next two or three days the website’s managers changed the search results to reflect a bias more favorable to a pro-abortion perspective.
In a subsequent Twitter post, Glaser claimed that a “search for ‘abortion’ on YouTube last week and the top results were a horrifying mix of gore and dangerous misinformation.” She went on to insist that “YouTube changed the results after I asked.”

In her Slate article, Glaser wrote that after YouTube followed her directions, “anti-abortion content meant to enrage or provoke viewers was no longer purely dominating the results” — which, translated, means that any video content designed to confront the viewer with the stark and murderous reality of abortion was sanitized from YouTube’s top “abortion” search results, replaced by content that gave all discussion on the killing of babies through abortion a safe and friendly texture.
Why eliminating pro-life content from YouTube’s top “abortion” search results matters so much to Glaser “is that more than 1.8 billion people look for information on YouTube every month,” she wrote, “and that could easily include someone who is considering getting an abortion.” The apparent implication here is that offering such individuals a truly balanced representation of abortion may just convince them that the procedure is wrong for them and their babies.
Among the previously top-ranked content that was de-ranked by YouTube following Glaser’s complaints were videos by pro-life group Live Action. The videos, which appeared to be among those Glaser labeled as “misleading,” were produced by Live Action “to educate viewers on how the different abortion procedures are actually committed, since the abortion industry fails to inform women of the truth,” explained the pro-life group after Glaser’s article appeared.
The group added that the videos in question “are from the ‘Abortion Procedures’ series, which show medical animations of the most common abortion procedures. The animations depict how a pre-born child appears during each stage, and are narrated by former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino, who committed thousands of abortions before becoming pro-life.”
Live Action defended the accuracy of the videos, saying that “Dr. Levatino has the experience to understand and explain how each type of abortion works.”
The Live Action videos, including some that were de-ranked by YouTube as a result of Glaser’s complaints, can be viewed here.
________________________________________________________
SEE: https://slate.com/technology/2018/12/youtube-search-abortion-results-pro-life.html?via=gdpr-consent
AND: https://pjmedia.com/trending/liberal-slate-writer-brags-about-getting-pro-life-videos-hidden-from-youtube-abortion-search/ 
SEE ALSO: 

 

Search for "abortion" on YouTube last week and the top results were a horrifying mix of gore and dangerous misinformation. YouTube changed the results after I asked https://slate.com/technology/2018/12/youtube-search-abortion-results-pro-life.html 
Leftist Slate Reporter: YouTube 'Changed Search Results' For Abortion 'After I Asked' 
https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=59597 
EXCERPTS:
 
Though Google CEO Sundar Pichai claimed last week in sworn testimony before congress that "we don't manually intervene on any particular search result," Glaser said that "YouTube changed the results after I asked."
 When I searched "abortion" on Saturday morning I had to scroll down 39 pages to find the video titled "LIVE Abortion Video on Display" -- which means you have to go past around 190 videos to get what was the number one result last week before Glaser complained.

I'm sure it's just a coincidence and Google's engineers are not manually rigging anything!