Thread: speaking out against the niqab

speaking i havent seen any of the muslim chicks back in my school wearing niqabs..
it seems things r worst in britain than here..
i wudnt even bothered talking with someone with face covered .. definitely rude.

Some excellent points Pubfather. But some that won't hold water, for instance the bit about UK society "certainly tolerates them far more than a corresponding Islamic nation would do" -- "Would do"? you know of future eventualities?

You say Hindus have managed, why are Pakistanis Muslims not managing it, why are they under achievers in school?? Lovely questions, what is the relationship between attitude and achievement??

Personally, I think the language of Multiculturalism as known in UK and the 'deprived sectors" of society bit, just plain silly -- Why had previous immigrants from Pakistan been successful but not this lot, by and large??

And if the only benefit of living in the West is economic, why not go back and build an economy that has the same kind of basis, then you may free to live as you want and be well off, no need to put up with anybody's insults, especially the State's.

Manchester Provides Homes with Loos for Muslims
From the desk of Paul Belien on Fri, 2006-07-28 20:38

Until recently I did not know that Muslims are not allowed to face Mecca (nor turn their back to it) when sitting on the loo. I heard about it last April when the British press reported that Brixton Prison near London is rebuilding toilets so Muslim inmates can defecate in the right direction. First I thought it was a joke. This week, however, the BBC website has a story on a housing estate in North England. The homes, with wind turbines and solar panels on the roofs, have up to seven bedrooms, kitchens that comply with halal cuisine and “bathrooms that face away from Mecca.”

The estate, developed by Manchester Methodist Housing Association, has been built exclusively for Muslims because, as one of the residents says, “We’re all Muslims here so yes, it is important [to live exclusively among Muslims]. For myself I’m not really too bothered but to a lot of the Muslim people, yes it is important to them and yes it is a very good idea.”

Try to imagine what would happen if a housing company in contemporary Europe were to develop a project exclusively for non-Muslims. Undoubtedly there would be an outcry, while anyone in contemporary Britain who would dare to state (even in a private conversation) that “to a lot of non-Muslims people, yes it is important not to live among Muslims and yes it is a very good idea” might find themselves convicted in court for racism.

Meanwhile, one wonders how easily a non-Muslim British family would find an affordable seven-bedroom home. Perhaps there is no demand for such homes since there hardly are any large non-Muslims families left. Many indigenous Brits no longer procreate. It is sometimes said that the birth rate in Muslim families will drop, too, when immigrant families become affluent and secularized. Manchester Methodist Housing Association, however, clearly does not think this will happen soon, otherwise it would not be building state-of-the-art houses for large families with bathrooms for Islamists.

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1225

Pubfather,

I find this a little skewed.

It is the govt/ housing groups which is interested in protecting the religious requirement of a certain minority segment and then the country complaining through artciles such as these.

Surely, this community cannot be blamed for action taken by the govt.

Originally Posted by tarek

Some excellent points Pubfather. But some that won't hold water, for instance the bit about UK society "certainly tolerates them far more than a corresponding Islamic nation would do" -- "Would do"? you know of future eventualities?

No, merely basing this on my perception of how Islamic countries work at the moment and in the immediate future. I may well be wrong, I'd like to be wrong.

You say Hindus have managed, why are Pakistanis Muslims not managing it, why are they under achievers in school?? Lovely questions, what is the relationship between attitude and achievement??

Simple. Some do not value education. Some are unable to accept discipline. I dont know a definitive reason for this but I could suggest a few.
1) Discipline in schools is less severe than it is at the Mosque, school is a retreat from the regimented, controlled life of a strict Muslim household.
2) Secular education is perhaps perceived as being less important than a religious one.
3) Parents who often cannot speak the language well and are therefore unable to help/support.

There are many more possibilities.

Why had previous immigrants from Pakistan been successful but not this lot, by and large??

An interesting question. The original Pakistanis (for eg) that moved to the UK faced open racism and discrimination and many succeeded inspite of this. Many of the factory jobs done by the original immigrants have vanished. This would disportionately affect certain Islamic communities such as in Bradford and Blackburn. I suspect some have simply stagnated - the father openned a shop or restaurant but there has been no growth beyond that. There is neither enough work, nor enough motivation in that work, to sustain the entire Muslim community. As certain Muslim groups become increasingly ghetto bound, this problem become worse. A vicious circle, if you like.

And if the only benefit of living in the West is economic, why not go back and build an economy that has the same kind of basis, then you may free to live as you want and be well off, no need to put up with anybody's insults, especially the State's.

Indeed. The easier path to economic success has always been seen to be migration. Pakistani youths have been known to say proudly that they are Pakistani. When asked if they want to go and live there.. "No chance, its a f*cking dump"....

Originally Posted by Ray

Pubfather,

I find this a little skewed.

It is the govt/ housing groups which is interested in protecting the religious requirement of a certain minority segment and then the country complaining through artciles such as these.

Surely, this community cannot be blamed for action taken by the govt.

This is part of the problem. Certain politically correct morons in local councils etc make decisions like these, born from some exaggerated sense of guilt. Decisions like this make ordinary non-Muslim Brits really p*ssed off. And then ordinary Brits get even more p*ssed off when Muslims moan about discrimination and economic hardship.

Theres a parallel between the minority of parasitical Muslim (living off the state) and parasitical Whites doing the same. The Muslims blame racism for their condition, the whites blame immigrants and aslyum seekers. Many of them are just lazy sods who dont want to work.

As for blaming Muslims for the decisions, you can't really. They take what they are offered. In the case above, they will then simply be living in an even less integrated environment. and so the problems will continue

It all comes down to how appropriate it is. If for instance I'm wandering around the beach wearing nothing but my budgie-smuggler, everything is fine. If, however I move out of sight of the beach and into say a bank, then it translates to me wearing nothing but a pair of undies, and becomes innapropriate. Western men do not leap on women and rape them simply because they show their face, and the Niqab is insulting in that it suggests they would. So the Niqab on the street, fine, in one on one conversation, insulting.

Originally Posted by parihaka

It all comes down to how appropriate it is. If for instance I'm wandering around the beach wearing nothing but my budgie-smuggler, everything is fine. If, however I move out of sight of the beach and into say a bank, then it translates to me wearing nothing but a pair of undies, and becomes innapropriate. Western men do not leap on women and rape them simply because they show their face, and the Niqab is insulting in that it suggests they would. So the Niqab on the street, fine, in one on one conversation, insulting.

But one could also be brainwashed to believe that western folks are the 'jumping types'!

With such a brainwashed attitude, anything will be believed except that it is fun living in such western countries and it improve the social status for the family back home as also bring home the bacon to live well in the western countries as also send a largess home to help the family left behind!

What I dislike immensely is this ' have your cake and eat it too' amongst many immigrants.

While I do not state that they should forsake their customs and traditions, but they must try to blend themselves with the local customs and also not be provocative in their ways.

Like if I were to go to Saudi Arabia, I sure would not start drinking in a public place or criticise their ways of life.

And anyway what about their Moral Police? Can I say that it should not be there and that it is archaic and silly?

What is the answer of the Moslems to this?

And yet they abuse the freedom of thought and speech when out of their cloistered Islamic countries.

These chaps, even on this forum, rubbish and chastise India for its caste system, which anyway has become a dino. They shout from the rooftops that Islam is without these silly social divisions and vehemently deny that it is prevalent in Islam too and that anything said in this regard is a vile Indian Israeli western propaganda to do down Islam.

I wonder what they would like to say if I told them that none other than the shining star of Islam, General President Musharraf in his book, 'In the Line of Fire" on Page 154 writes, 'The population is divided into vertical compartments of provinces, tribes, clan, caste, and sub caste'.

These blokes constantly live in a state of denial.

Unless they open up their eyes to reality, they will be a retrograded section of humanity and to their own peril.

If they want to remain moribund, it is OK. But they are like crabs. They want to pull others down too and create a whole lot of hassles that are not worth the consideration since they are antediluvian.

Originally Posted by Ray

It is essential to understand the significance of the niqab, hijab and such like restriction or dress codes for women in Islam.

Islam is one of the new religions of the world and hence to increase its followers, it had to undertake operations to increase its jurisdiction around the world. The easiest way to do so was by waging wars, which it did and is now history. Likewise, Islam had cranked in ways and means to "encourage" the vanquished to embrace Islam.

When the menfolk are waging wars and are not there to protect womenfolk, it became essential to ensure that they are NOT open to the lust of those remaining behind. Hence, one of the ways was to ensure that the women are kept away from society at large or they do not appear provocative to attract the lust of the men left behind is the niqab.

Thus, all means to make their women unattractive was taken and hence the drab, black shroud called burkha or wearing niqab.

Yet, if women had to go out, then they had to be accompanied by their menfolk for protection.

Therefore, in those times, it was possibly a sensible thing to have been done.

Women, in those times, were cared for by their menfolk or by their families and hence they did not have the requirement to interact with any other not in the family.

In these times of modernity where men and women have to interact for professional or social reasons or for purchase of goods etc, the requirement of the niqab become redundant and superflous, except to hallmark a special indentity.

Hence, there appears to be no requirement for a niqab socially or as a general purpose dress.

It indeed proves a barrier for communication and interaction.

It is like holding a bedsheet or a counterpane between two persons interacting for a legitimate purpose.

One can observe the puritan attitude necessary for Islam in the link below. Whether it is relevant in modern times is a moot question.

http://www.themodernreligion.com/mis...asic-fiqh.html

So Islamic men have no self contol and to help curb lustful rapes they force women to wear this veil. I suppose if that article about Sweden and the rise in rapes is true I guess Islamic men really do have no self control or are inherently violent nut jobs.

Edit/ disclaimer


Obviously not all are like this, I’ve just got a roll on paintbrush today and the trends I see are scary.

Originally Posted by parihaka

It all comes down to how appropriate it is. If for instance I'm wandering around the beach wearing nothing but my budgie-smuggler, everything is fine. If, however I move out of sight of the beach and into say a bank, then it translates to me wearing nothing but a pair of undies, and becomes innapropriate. Western men do not leap on women and rape them simply because they show their face, and the Niqab is insulting in that it suggests they would. So the Niqab on the street, fine, in one on one conversation, insulting.

Couldn't have said it better my man.

Originally Posted by parihaka

It all comes down to how appropriate it is. If for instance I'm wandering around the beach wearing nothing but my budgie-smuggler, everything is fine. If, however I move out of sight of the beach and into say a bank, then it translates to me wearing nothing but a pair of undies, and becomes innapropriate. Western men do not leap on women and rape them simply because they show their face, and the Niqab is insulting in that it suggests they would. So the Niqab on the street, fine, in one on one conversation, insulting.

It's more than that: it is a measure of their willingness to respect the sensibilities of the host culture.

"Host culture" -- We are talking of "citizens"? -- Do "citizens" no longer have rights of citizenship?? Uniforms for all??

The lunatic fringe of English society wants to wear niqabs - why does anybody care?? I really don't get it.

Want to wear it, go ahead, don't want to wear it, go ahead -- it isn't extremist muslim britishers dismantling the ethical state, it morons who disguise their bigotry under the cloak of "host culture" and sensibilities of the majority -- have minority groups now to conform to majority fears about them? in a democracy??

So it was Ok that jews had to wear labels or hindu and sikhs - after all, the majority and their sensibilities have to accomodated?? You know,to fit in and all that.

Originally Posted by tarek

"Host culture" -- We are talking of "citizens"? -- Do "citizens" no longer have rights of citizenship?? Uniforms for all??

The lunatic fringe of English society wants to wear niqabs - why does anybody care?? I really don't get it.

Want to wear it, go ahead, don't want to wear it, go ahead -- it isn't extremist muslim britishers dismantling the ethical state, it morons who disguise their bigotry under the cloak of "host culture" and sensibilities of the majority -- have minority groups now to conform to majority fears about them? in a democracy??

So it was Ok that jews had to wear labels or hindu and sikhs - after all, the majority and their sensibilities have to accomodated?? You know,to fit in and all that.

Wearing of niqabs or going nude did not bother any Britishers, excepting the skinheads, prior to the born again Islamist surge of the Ummah and its devastating signature all over the world.

It is just the fear of the unknown, which is a normal human reaction, gets re-ignited when one does not know what is behind the niqab. It is intriguing that people are fear crazed to be recognised. That appears an irrational fear to the logical mind!

The Jews, the Hindus, the Sikhs or even the Catholics go about their business without provoking the native sensibilities nor are they militant in their attitude nor do they permeate fear in the population at large by calling for holy or unholy wars against the very country where they are the citizens; nor flock in hordes to listen to such scurrilous and seditious sermons by priests (there being none in their religious denominations, but is common amongst the Moslems) to show differentiation from the civil society at large.

This is what differentiate the various non Christian communities in Great Britain less the Moslems, who are obtusely provocative in their stance.

Of course, there are Moslems in UK who are sick to the gills at these silly other Moslems who bring them a bad name and ostracising.

It maybe interesting to note that an Indian Christian family had "Kill Moslems" sprayed on the wall of their home scaring the living hell out of them (this news came out in the Telegraph Kolkata). Imagine it, because of the Moslems and because they were not whites and so mistaken as Moslem Asians, they got targeted because of the wild and dangerous behaviour of these wild Moslems (segment), who reaping the benefits of the country as citizens and at the same time are being utterly disloyal and treacherous by wanting to create dangerous situation for 'their' country!

I ask, with equal concern, why should Indians of any religious denomination, who are law abiding, suffer because of the Moslem shenanigans and murderous and treacherous behaviour?

Why?

Ray

We have to be clear, are we talking about british muslims or muslims around the world?? You say "born again Islamist surge of the Ummah and its devastating signature all over the world."

It's a cheap shot, but hey, you're entitled - so again, we are talking about UK muslims right or around the world? it is a political and social problem at present in the UK, right? -- so are these people citizens or not?? if they are, what's the beef?

Hindus and jews did not offend the sensibilities of "host" majority cultures?? what planet was this on?? Did taliban require Hindus to ID themselves, a yellow star of david, because it was a fashion statment??

Seditious sermons? Papists, are they?

Hey, Sikhs were killed in the US because they had turbans and so did Osama, those poor Sikhs just did not realize that they can't go about offending the sensibilities of the majority, citizen or not - Alas

Why should Indians suffer ? A question best posed to their persecutors not their fellow victims of ignorance - Don't you think, sorry, don't you FEEL?

Originally Posted by tarek

"Host culture" -- We are talking of "citizens"? -- Do "citizens" no longer have rights of citizenship?? Uniforms for all??

The lunatic fringe of English society wants to wear niqabs - why does anybody care?? I really don't get it.

Want to wear it, go ahead, don't want to wear it, go ahead -- it isn't extremist muslim britishers dismantling the ethical state, it morons who disguise their bigotry under the cloak of "host culture" and sensibilities of the majority -- have minority groups now to conform to majority fears about them? in a democracy??

So it was Ok that jews had to wear labels or hindu and sikhs - after all, the majority and their sensibilities have to accomodated?? You know,to fit in and all that.

No, hiding your face is disrespectful and I can't read your emotions. I would have to remove a face mask if I walked into a bank for example for obvious reasons and so should they. Also the whole reason there is a debate is that the veil makes people uncomfortable and they don't give a rats a$$ which makes it the more deplorable.

Thanks for letting me in your country, oh you don't like what I'm doing? Well, go fuk yourself then.

We wonder why people are pissed, I wouldn't get smashed in the streets of Saudi and my girlfriend would be expected to wear a head scarf, why do we not get the same rights to tell them to take it off as that **** don't fly here?