Thread: speaking out against the niqab

Originally Posted by tarek

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?

Oh Sikhs have been **** stirring in Canada, I have no idea why they pushed to be allowed to carry a Kripan to school. Knives have no place in school period, as the host culture that pissed me off. When I wore a kilt to my graduation I had to wear a plastic Skein Duh and that is MY cultural heritage well one of them anyway, I'm a Canuck and therefore Heinz 57 mongrel mix. Anyway, point being is that new cultures come in and at times go against the grain and wehn the people who where there first (read white boy) we get branded racist and it's really starting to piss us off.

Hell, I'm not even allowed to be proud to be white. Can you imagine me screaming white power? Now replace white with black and it seems okay. We're getting annoyed and now scared on top of that and it's a volitile situation and something has got to give.

Originally Posted by tarek

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?

You are being unduly sensitive.

These British Moslem boys were absolutely as British in their behaviour, likes and dislikes as any Tom, Dick or Harry white Britisher, before being indoctrinated by the mullahs. Am I right in that surmise? Or were they different and were terrorists from the day they were born? I believe that they were not even madrassa educated!

I personally don't know any of them nor have I broken bread with them. I am merely going by the news reports wherein the British Moslem neighbours have opined so, and so has the uncle of one of the bombers. The friends have said that they had of late become religious! Note: "of late". Therefore, I will take it that they were "good lads"!

How did they turn terrorists?

Obviously, the mullah would have influenced him into grand dreams of the Caliphate and the Ummah. Or could you give any other reasons how they suddenly became terrorists from being ideal boys?

Therefore, the equation which you call "cheap shot" is prompted by your defensive state of mind which fails to comprehend the logic behind my statement, and is actually a illlogical conclusion by you, loaded with the baggage of subconscious guilt that reqjuires no elaboration, lest it offends your sensibilities. I give way to PC.

One is a citizen so long as they are not treacherous to the country of their birth or domicile. That is the beef. It is not a political or a social problem. It is a clear cut case of treachery! It is an act against the nation.

You have a different view?

Hindus and jews did not offend the sensibilities of "host" majority cultures?? what planet was this on??

Did the Hindus, Jews or Jains or Buddhists offend the sensibilties of the "host" culture? Do educate.

The planet is Earth. Plant your feet frimly and you will realise it so.

Did taliban require Hindus to ID themselves, a yellow star of david, because it was a fashion statment??

I guess you understand English better than I.

Do read the stuff below!

Speaks for itself.

Or was it done to make it a "fashion statement"?

Now, if the Taliban can do it i.e. enforce their dress code on non Moslems and the Islamic world does not protest, then why howl when they politely tell that it is just "not done"?

You speak of fairness and justice. Where is fairness and justice being perpetuated by the Taliban? Where is all this fairness and justice that the Islamic nations demand of the West and other countries, not so West? How come not a cheep from them on this discrimination on CITIZENS?

How is it that a fair man like you also seem to have taken an ostrich view or adopted a Nelson's eye?

Taliban to mark Afghan Hindus

While leaders say action protects Hindus, others calls it blatant discrimination

May 22, 2001
Web posted at: 5:18 PM EDT (2118 GMT)

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Afghanistan's ruling Taliban militia announced plans on Tuesday to force Hindus to wear identity labels, sparking a backlash in India and elsewhere.

A Taliban spokesman said the order was issued to safeguard the rights of Hindus so that they are not accosted by the religious police who ensure that Afghans adhere to Muslim rules.

The edict also requires Hindu women to wear veils, as Muslim women do.

The move is the latest in a series of Taliban measures to crack down, or to segregate, un-Islamic and idolatrous segments of its society.

"Religious minorities living in an Islamic state must be identified," said the Taliban's religious police minister Mohammed Wali.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/fyi/new...dus/index.html

And this is what the most friendly country of Pakistan i.e.lChina has to say. You can not now call it western propaganda.

Taliban: Hindus Must Wear Identity Labels

Afghanistan's ruling Taliban militia said Tuesday it will require Hindus to wear labels on their clothing to distinguish them from Muslims, a proposal sharply denounced by the United States and India.

The Taliban said the measure, which also would require Hindu women to be veiled, was aimed at keeping non-Muslims from being harassed by religious police enforcing Islamic law.

The order, reminiscent of Nazi Germany's rule forcing Jews to wear a Star of David, brought more criticism upon the group which is already isolated for its harsh brand of Islam and treatment of women.
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/en...523_70812.html

Seditious sermons? Papists, are they?

Familiar with the name Abu Hamza as a starter? He was, of course, wanting to spread universal love for humanity, right? He wanted all to identify with the Queen, right?! What did he and his like stand for? Peace and harmony? Love your country?

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

Yes one Sikh was killed. All thanks to the Moslem demagogues who has stupidly wrecked the stability of the world in the pursuit of their Holy Grail - the Ummah and the Caliphate!

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?

Ignorance is universal. If one is intelligent and wise as you wish to claim the Moslems are, they should have realised that they would agitate the "ignorant" who would take out their anger on people not connected to the crime and yet having one part of their attire that is akin to the criminals (of a different religion)!

I "feel" nothing at these repeated stupidity and murderous acts and wanton butchery perpetuated some of the Islamic faith in the name of Islam.

They have numbed me into disbelief that such vile acts, which are actually abject cowardice, could be carried out in the name of a religion (that boasts of warriors like Sallauddin); and their coreligionist prefer to remain silent about it and then return to wail on feigned discrimination and delude themselves that it is a social and political question when, in actuality, it is treason and unmitigated criminal acts.

Bravo!!!!!

Originally Posted by Ray

Now, if the Taliban can do it i.e. enforce their dress code on non Moslems and the Islamic world does not protest, then why howl when they politely tell that it is just "not done"?

I'm beginning to suspect that it is the wests very tolerance of difference that is an insult, and that must be pushed and challenged to see if it will break.
When an oppressive society is shown an open one, the oppressive society seeks to use what it sees as weakness to destroy that open society: this is why Islam is challenging the conventions of tolerance and openess in the west by demanding greater and greater freedoms whilst not even suggesting it in their traditional societies.
Whatever it may be, the claim of persecution and victimhood is the greatest of hypocrisy

A Muslim woman has been suspended by a school in West Yorkshire after she insisted on wearing a veil in lessons.

Bilingual support worker Aishah Azmi, 24, was asked to remove the veil after pupils found it hard to understand her during English language lessons.

Headfield Church of England Junior School, in Dewsbury, said she could wear the veil outside the classroom.

Ms Azmi refused and was suspended pending the outcome of an employment tribunal, Kirklees Council said.

The tribunal heard the case in September and is due to announce its decision within the next two weeks.

There is no religious obligation whatsoever for Muslim women to cover themselves up in front of primary school children
Shahid Malik, Labour MP for Dewsbury

Dewsbury MP Shahid Malik backed the school's decision, saying: "In schools the top priority has got to be the education of our children.

"I fully support the decision of the education authority and the school in requesting the classroom assistant remove her veil when teaching primary school children.

"I believe the education authority has bent over backwards to be accommodating and has been extremely reasonable and sensible in the decision it has come to.

"There is no religious obligation whatsoever for Muslim women to cover themselves up in front of primary school children."

'Inadequate standards'

The school, which has 529 pupils aged seven to 11, takes many children from different ethnic backgrounds where English is not the first language.

An Ofsted report carried out in February said: "The first languages spoken by most children are Panjabi, Gujarati and Urdu, and many children are still learning to speak English.

"Significant improvement is required in relation to the inadequate standards of achievement reached by children and their slow progress over time.

"Children's speaking skills are poor and this holds them back in most aspects of their work."

Kirklees Council's children's services spokesman, Jim Dodds, said Ms Azmi's suspension was "nothing to do with religion".

Teachers' concern

"We are simply trying to ensure that our children get the best possible education," he said.

"Both pupils and teachers raised concerns because they were finding it difficult to make out what she was saying during lessons.

"We have a lot of pupils who do not speak English as a first language and you have to be able to see people's lips move when you are being taught.

"We asked this young lady to remove her veil when she was teaching English language, but she refused."

Mr Dodds said that even if Ms Azmi won her case the council would not change its position.

"Our only concern is that the children are taught properly," he said.

Last week, Commons leader Jack Straw angered some Muslims when he said wearing the veil made community relations more difficult.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/h...rd/6046992.stm

First Blast of the Trumpet against the monstrous legion of Islam (lol)
The point behind this whole debate is that Jack Straw went on record as saying that he asked Muslim women to remove the nijab in private conversation with him. The same as is cuturally expected that someone inside romove their sunglasses, or a a hat/baseball cap. The woman in the above article was assisting the teaching of infants, to which the wearing of the nijab would have utterly terrifying.

It puts into perfect context the real debate. Should Muslim compromise when living within a different culture (the way that other cultures compromise when living under even moderate Islamic rule). Yes they should. If they want to integate. Compromise is a two-way street. Yet the the traffic has been one-way for too long.

Muslims insist on being a special case when it suits them, and on being the same when it doesnt.

I'm so glad you posted this, there is no reason on Earth why this lady should hide from children. I almost see this as some attention grap like when I purposefully antagonize my boss just to see how far I can push the fat bastard.

Originally Posted by Expat Canuck

I'm so glad you posted this, there is no reason on Earth why this lady should hide from children. I almost see this as some attention grap like when I purposefully antagonize my boss just to see how far I can push the fat bastard.

There is no reason. Moderate Islamic opinion says the same. It's just nonsense. Anyone can see how ridiculuous the whole nijab malarky is.

As I said, I believe it's deliberate testing of the boundaries, designed to insult.

And/or an alien culture attempting to impose itself.

There can be no other purpose than the making of a statement or a stand. If a tribunal upholds her stand, that will be another statement and a precedent.

I had previously been lukewarm about the French ban on Muslim dress in schools, but can now see a wisdom in it.


Or maybe she had zits..