I dunno… If I lived in a country where Muslim demographics were threatening to outnumber the non-Muslim population by means of their prolific birth rates, I would be nervous too. They would be very anti-freedom if they were in power. The liberals here sticking up for them would probably be the first to have their heads on the chopping block.
I piss on their putrid Koran.
[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
I piss on their putrid Koran.[/quote]
A gentleman and a scholar
[quote]AlisaV wrote:
All right Sifu:
I cut some corners. Religion is not race. And if you don’t want me to call it scaremongering, then all right, I won’t. [/quote]
What I don’t like about the use of the term scaremongering is it gets used to dismiss and denigrate an issue while simultaneously avoiding discussing it. It is an intellectually lazy, weasel move that can be applied to any concern.
[quote]
My problem with these kinds of demographic “They will overwhelm us” arguments is that it leads to no good solutions. [/quote]
It may not be a nice, pleasent, comfortable subject to discuss but that doesn’t mean that it isn’t an important subject that has serious ramifications for the future. There is a lot of history to support the arguement that this is a very serious issue. ie East coast Indian tribes (like the ones who helped the Pilgrims)that ended up on reservations in the desert in Nevada or Arizona.
The time to deal with these issues is early in the process because that is when solutions are the easiest. In life it is better to be proactive than reactive. [quote]
Tighten borders? Won’t work. The people in the banlieues have been in France for several generations.[/quote]
Why wouldn’t that work? It may not stop the growth of the homegrown population but it will slow the growth of the overall population. It would buy time to try and get them to assimilate.
[quote]
Make non-Muslim French women have more babies? Sorry, an indidvidual’s womb is her own. I’d put subsidizing or officially encouraging childbirth in the same category. [/quote]
That is the million dollar question. If western women wish to excercise their right to live a modern lifestyle where they go to college, have a career and only have one or two kids instead of a more “traditional” role as a domestic goddess with 3-15 kids that going to limit the amount of immigrants that can be absorbed and assimilated.
[quote]
Make Muslim French women have fewer babies? I hope you shudder too.[/quote]
I am not a fan of governmental intervention in peoples sex lives. I would hope that you also shudder at the prospect of women being forced to have babies whether they want them or not. Burqas play a role in putting young women and girls in a position where they have no choice in such matters.
In Britain they put girls as young as four into burqas. There are thousands of young British born muslim girls who apparently are no longer present in Britain. Because of the burqa these girls had no public identity, so nobody notices when they go missing. What happens is they get shipped off fo arrainged marriages in places like Pakistan.
[quote]
Make Muslims feel as unwelcome as possible with gestures like Sarkozy’s? Seems totally unsuccessful at promoting upward mobility. More likely to please a few nativists and possibly entrench French-Muslim radicalism.
A little bit of history http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,902695,00.html (I hope it won’t be misunderstood) should give some perspective here. [/quote]
What Sarkozy is doing is nothing compared to how unwelcome Britains Labour government has made the English feel. There is a lot of that going around Europe.
That Time article is not the best comparison. While the Chicano family structure can be patriarchal and controlling of girls the muslims take it to a whole other level. Chicano militancy has been motivated by issues of social justice, muslim militancy is all about religion. I would be a lot happier living in the East LA barrio than I would be in Paris Nord.
[quote]
What I would get behind is broadening and improving education (including making sure everyone knows French), loosening up labor laws, enforcing the law in the banlieues, possibly some urban renewal (though it has a mixed track record), and, though I know you won’t like this, perhaps having more of a culture of diversity that could provide some role models. As it is, a lot of these people seem to think, quite reasonably, that they don’t have a chance in hell of a job, let alone reaching the middle class. [/quote]
If only it were so simple as giving people jobs. The Saudis have used their wealth to build mosques and staff them with wahabist imamms all over Europe. Some of the 2nd, 3rd generation etc…French British muslims are more fundamental islamist than their parents or their families back in the old country. What has developed is a western European strain of islam that is virulently fundamentalist and rejectionist of western European culture. A diversity drive with a culture that deliberately rejects all other cultures and seeks to impose itself is not going to work.
[quote]
There’s no affirmative action in France; Muslim schoolkids don’t even see anyone who looks like them in their textbooks. Reviled as all this stuff is by the right, I think it makes a difference in the self-perception of minority groups in the US vs. France. Knowing that you are nothing but a “problem” to the authorities will make you less willing to participate in the system. [/quote]
Affirmative action is no answer. The only reason why it remotely made sense here is because of several hundred years of slavery followed by a hundred years of Jim Crow did a lot of damage to the African American community. Most reasonable people will accept that something needed to be done help them get a leg up.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Aragorn wrote:
lixy wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
I hadn’t known about Samira Bellil or the prevalence of gang-rapes,
For reference, rape is seven times more prevalent per capita in Australia it is in France. It is also six times worse in Canada and twice in the US.
While this is probably true, that statistic has ABSOLUTELY no bearing on the importance of the issue of gang-rape INSIDE France.
Don’t be ridiculous! The importance of gang-rape is not in question here. It’s completely silly to claim that the issue would be more important within a set of imaginary landlines than outside it.
I commented on Alisa’s sentence that talks about her ignorance of the “prevalence” of gang-rapes in France, by providing a frame of “reference”. [/quote]
No you did not provide a frame of referrence. All you have done is go on the defensive and try to keep people ignorant of what is going on in the muslim slums.
[quote]
If it is a growing or steady problem inside the country,
It’s neither. [/quote]
If it is not a problem why are French muslim women saying it’s a problem and forming activist groups to deal with the problem?
[quote]
No. It’s the same as the fact that narcotic use in certain areas of the US is a big problem while narcotic use in Mexico is orders of magnitude higher[…] It is and should be an issue for US domestic policy.
I totally disagree. But that’s another story…
Besides which, you are taking national average statistics, when the problem is clearly not of homogenous concentration throughout France. Instead the problem is a very concentrated problem in certain areas (slums with a high population of Muslim immigrants), and not very much of an issue outside of those areas.
True. What’s your point? Is Islam behind it? Their Maghrebian blood? Or is it socio-economics?[/quote]
Are you trying to suggest that Islam has nothing to do with what is going on in the muslim slums? Rape has been a part of islam ever since mohamad who is well known to have comitted a number of rapes. Treating women and girls as chattel goes back to mohammad too.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
The real answer is for everyone to stop being so precious about false concepts like national identity, historic culture and whatever other claptrap and realise that we are all human beings. These are exactly the same areguments that come up when people debate gay marriage, Mexican imigration into the US or whatever other NIMBY issue you want to pick.
The lines on the map have moved countless times over the years and with the globalisation afforded by the information age these ideas are totally outdated.[/quote]
No the real answer is to not let dreamy eyed idiots like you anywhere near control of a nations government. It is because of fools like you pursuing your dreamy idealism while ignoring facts on the ground that Europe has big problems coming.
The big problem with people like you is you have no loyalty. Because you have no loyalty you can’t understand it in others. Because you don’t have the necessary frame of referrence to deal with others who do, people like you are very dangerous. The British government is run by people like you.
[quote]lixy wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
All right Sifu:
I cut some corners. Religion is not race. And if you don’t want me to call it scaremongering, then all right, I won’t.
My problem with these kinds of demographic “They will overwhelm us” arguments is that it leads to no good solutions.
Just so you know whom you’re dealing with, Sifu advocates discriminating on religious grounds when granting visas and residencies, sending all Muslims “home” (whatever that means). When I asked him what can be done about the second/third/fourth/fifth generations, he proposed building detention camps and locking the Muslims in there.
That’s when I stopped replying to him.
[/quote]
You stopped replying to me is because I repeatedly owned your ass by pointing out all your contradictions and lies.
What I advocate is reciprocity in dealing with muslims. ie Saudi Arabia isn’t letting it’s millions of migrant workers become citizens and setup houses or worship for faiths other than islam. Even though Saudi Arabia is building mosques all over Europe. Dubai isn’t giving it’s millions of migrant workers citizenship either, because the migrants would outnumber them.
The muslim world is hateful to outsiders where it is quite common for non muslims to be murdered. It is suicide to keep importing and harboring that kind of hatred into our country thereby expaning their territory.
It is not fair that in order to give muslims a new home to live in outside of their own fucked up countries we have to be subjected to terrorist atacks and have our hard won civil liberties and freedoms eroded because of their presence.
Contrary to what Lixy has written what I proposed was deporting the muslims back to their country of origin and giving the ones who were born in the west the option of going back to their ancestral homeland. Only the ones who refused to go or who couldn’t go would need to be put in internment camps.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
PB-Crawl wrote:
Sifu wrote:
PB-Crawl wrote:
Sifu wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
If you think banning hats will do anything to ebb this, well you should apply for a position in the obama admin.
I’m not saying their treatment is ok in anyway or that these “men” should be free to act that way, I just don’t think transferring misogyny from one culture to the next is any logical way to deal with it. These women’s freedom is being denied either way.
It is amazing the attitude that many of you are bringing to this issue. The burqa is part of a culture that sees nothing wrong with human trafficing. The suggestion that this is a matter of choice for muslim women is bullshit.
The burqa is a portable prison cell where the public does not know what is going on behind that mask. It is a tool for abusers to get away with abusing women.
Forcing someone to wear a burqa is wrong. The issue however is not the burqa, it is allowing someone or a group to force someone else to do something against their will. Banning the burqa doesn’t fix that issue.[/quote]
If banning the burqa is wrong would a British muslim woman say she wishes Britain would follow the french lead? You liberals will be the death of liberalism.
Why I, as a British Muslim woman, want the burkha banned from our streets
By Saira Khan
Shopping in Harrods last week, I came across a group of women wearing black burkhas, browsing the latest designs in the fashion department.
The irony of the situation was almost laughable. Here was a group of affluent women window shopping for designs that they would never once be able to wear in public.
Yet it’s a sight that’s becoming more and more commonplace. In hardline Muslim communities right across Britain, the burkha and hijab - the Muslim headscarf - are becoming the norm.
In the predominantly Muslim enclaves of Derby near my childhood home, you now see women hidden behind the full-length robe, their faces completely shielded from view. In London, I see an increasing number of young girls, aged four and five, being made to wear the hijab to school.
Shockingly, the Dickensian bone disease rickets has reemerged in the British Muslim community because women are not getting enough vital vitamin D from sunlight because they are being consigned to life under a shroud.
Thanks to fundamentalist Muslims and ‘hate’ preachers working in Britain, the veiling of women is suddenly all-pervasive and promoted as a basic religious right. We are led to believe that we must live with this in the name of ‘tolerance’.
And yet, as a British Muslim woman, I abhor the practice and am calling on the Government to follow the lead of French President Nicolas Sarkozy and ban the burkha in our country.
The veil is simply a tool of oppression which is being used to alienate and control women under the guise of religious freedom.
My parents moved here from Kashmir in the 1960s. They brought with them their faith and their traditions - but they also understood that they were starting a new life in a country where Islam was not the main religion.
My mother has always worn traditional Kashmiri clothes - the salwar kameez, a long tunic worn over trousers, and the chador, which is like a pashmina worn around the neck or over the hair.
When she found work in England, she adapted her dress without making a fuss. She is still very much a traditional Muslim woman, but she swims in a normal swimming costume and jogs in a tracksuit.
I was born in this country, and my parents’ greatest desire for me was that I would integrate and take advantage of the British education system.
They wanted me to make friends at school, and be able to take part in PE lessons - not feel alienated and cut off from my peers. So at home, I wore the salwar kameez, while at school I wore a wore a typical English school uniform.
Now, to some fundamentalists, that made us not proper Muslims. Really?
I have read the Koran. Nowhere in the Koran does it state that a woman’s face and body must be covered in a layer of heavy black cloth. Instead, Muslim women should dress modestly, covering their arms and legs.
Many of my adult British Muslim friends cover their heads with a headscarf - and I have no problem with that.
The burkha is an entirely different matter. It is an imported Saudi Arabian tradition, and the growing number of women veiling their faces in Britain is a sign of creeping radicalisation, which is not just regressive, it is oppressive and downright dangerous.
The burkha is an extreme practice. It is never right for a woman to hide behind a veil and shut herself off from people in the community. But it is particularly wrong in Britain, where it is alien to the mainstream culture for someone to walk around wearing a mask.
The veil restricts women. It stops them achieving their full potential in all areas of their life, and it stops them communicating. It sends out a clear message: ‘I do not want to be part of your society.’
Every time the burkha is debated, Muslim fundamentalists bring out all these women who say: ‘It’s my choice to wear this.’
Perhaps so - but what pressures have been brought to bear on them? The reality, surely, is that a lot of women are not free to choose.
Girls as young as four are wearing the hijab to school: that is not a freely made choice. It stops them taking part in education and reaching their potential, and the idea that tiny children need to protect their modesty is abhorrent.
And behind the closed doors of some Muslim houses, countless young women are told to wear the hijab and the veil. These are the girls who are hidden away, they are not allowed to go to university or choose who they marry. In many cases, they are kept down by the threat of violence.
The burkha is the ultimate visual symbol of female oppression. It is the weapon of radical Muslim men who want to see Sharia law on Britain’s streets, and would love women to be hidden, unseen and unheard. It is totally out of place in a civilised country.
Precisely because it is impossible to distinguish between the woman who is choosing to wear a burkha and the girl who has been forced to cover herself and live behind a veil, I believe it should be banned
President Sarkozy is absolutely right to say: ‘If you want to live here, live like us.’
He went on to say that the burkha is not a religious sign, ‘it’s a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement… In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity.’
So what should we do in Britain? For decades, Muslim fundamentalists, using the human rights laws, have been allowed to get their own way.
It is time for ministers and ordinary British Muslims to say, ‘Enough is enough’. For the sake of women and children, the Government must ban the wearing of the hijab in school and the burkha in public places.
To do so is not racist, as extremists would have us believe. After all, when I go to Pakistan or Middle Eastern countries, I respect the way they live.
Two years ago, I wore a burkha for the first time for a television programme. It was the most horrid experience. It restricted the way I walked, what I saw, and how I interacted with the world.
It took away my personality. I felt alienated and like a freak. It was hot and uncomfortable, and I was unable to see behind me, exchange a smile with people, or shake hands.
If I had been forced to wear a veil, I would certainly not be free to write this article. Nor would I have run a marathon, become an aerobics teacher or set up a business.
We must unite against the radical Muslim men who love to control women.
My message to those Muslims who want to live in a Talibanised society, and turn their face against Britain, is this: 'If you don’t like living here and don’t want to integrate, then what the hell are you doing here? Why don’t you just go and live in an Islamic country?
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu is also a staunch supporter of a UK political organisation with proven links to Neonazi Paramilitary groups which is headed by Holocaust deniers.[/quote]
You are so pathetic. Because I have made mincemeat out of you in numerous debates all you can now do is resort to character assassination.
You are the resident Tory/Labour sympathizer. It was a Tory government that refused to allow Jews fleeing Nazi persecution entry into their traditional homeland in what was then called Palestine. Hitler used this refusal to take the Jews as justification for the final solution. The Tories made that situation far more deadlier for the Jews than it needed to be.
Or how about how a Labour government took a third of India and gave just gave it to biggotted hateful Islam? There are over a hundred million Sikhs, but because of Labour they have to apply for permission from muslims to be able to visit their holy city because it is now in Pakistan.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
lixy wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
All right Sifu:
I cut some corners. Religion is not race. And if you don’t want me to call it scaremongering, then all right, I won’t.
My problem with these kinds of demographic “They will overwhelm us” arguments is that it leads to no good solutions.
Just so you know whom you’re dealing with, Sifu advocates discriminating on religious grounds when granting visas and residencies, sending all Muslims “home” (whatever that means). When I asked him what can be done about the second/third/fourth/fifth generations, he proposed building detention camps and locking the Muslims in there.
That’s when I stopped replying to him.
link please.[/quote]
Whatever idiot let the T-Nation.com domain name slide into the wrong hands made it extremely hard to search the archive.
But Sifu just confirmed it a post above. I don’t think I misrepresented his views, now did I?
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu is also a staunch supporter of a UK political organisation with proven links to Neonazi Paramilitary groups which is headed by Holocaust deniers.
You are so pathetic. Because I have made mincemeat out of you in numerous debates all you can now do is resort to character assassination.
[/quote]
110% right.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
lixy wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
I hadn’t known about Samira Bellil or the prevalence of gang-rapes,
For reference, rape is seven times more prevalent per capita in Australia it is in France. It is also six times worse in Canada and twice in the US.
This has already been argued here. Australia also has higher rates of crime reporting for rape. [/quote]
Actually the real figure is probably quite higher, the muslim rape gangs (those maggots ID themselves as muslims) who operated in NSW, their victims, who were in court were only the tip of the iceberg according to social workers who work in the sexual assault centres in NSW.
Speaking to them in re to rape and domestic violence within the Muslim communilty and they state there is prob only 1-3% are reported to the police, they report these ''communitys'' to be one of of the most dysfunctional and abusive to women and children currently in Australia.
[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
The real answer is for everyone to stop being so precious about false concepts like national identity, historic culture and whatever other claptrap and realise that we are all human beings…
The lines on the map have moved countless times over the years and with the globalisation afforded by the information age these ideas are totally outdated.[/quote]
This is total idiocy. I’m not really surprised, but then I am–for some reason I don’t know–very disappointed.
If everyone on the planet thought this way it is conceivable your position could work. That is true. Unfortunately, I live in the real world. No matter how much you want, hope, or pray for the world to work this way, it will NEVER DO SO. If by some remarkable chance it does, it will be long after you are dead, along with this entire generation and the one after it.
It is this sort of “pie in the sky” utopianism that is killing intellectual thought. Ideas are useless if they have no basis in the real world. You can work on changing the world to apply your ideas, but you are without any basis in reality at all when you say these things.
Sifu:
I take Muslim extremism and illiberalism seriously. I am a feminist (yeah, yeah, let the fury begin) and I believe that the most serious problems facing women are often from traditional cultures, and yes, I think the burka is a limitation on women’s freedom and I would not be happy to see it prevalent in my country. But if we abandon our values in the interest of protecting them, we’ve lost.
If you think it is wrong for women to be forced into the role of a full-time wife and mother with limited education, you can’t turn around and say that non-Muslim woman are failing their duty if they reject that role.
If liberties matter to you, if civil society matters to you, you can’t have the government ban pieces of clothing, and you certainly can’t deport people based on their religion. Think about that, for a moment – that punishes the innocent with the guilty. Don’t you have Muslim friends and colleagues?
I’m for moderate assimilation. Moderate, because I don’t want to stop anyone from having pride in a foreign heritage – but yes, I think people are better off learning the local language, and yes, I think that values like individual rights and tolerance ought to be shared even when they’re not part of an immigrant’s home culture. But assimilation comes from hope. People buy into the system when it offers them something, when becoming French or becoming British or American gives them a chance of a better life. When immigrants aren’t assimilating, maybe they’re being failed by society. I don’t see anything in your remarks that would be much good at encouraging assimilation.
Think about Chinese foot binding. It had been common practice in China for centuries, and then died out very rapidly in the early 20th century. A foreign campaign of educational information about the health consequences of foot-binding caught on among Chinese modernizers, and suddenly foot-binding became provincial, embarrassing, old-fashioned. Nobody would marry a girl with bound feet. And within a decade or two, it was gone. Culture can change. I think Wahhabist Islam is an illiberal culture which needs to change. But the thing is, it can, and it doesn’t need to be by the sword.
My point with the Times article is that my country went through a time when it seemed to make war on its own people, and it was a horror, and that nobody should do that again. You cannot treat a whole category of people like a mere problem.
Everyone knows what’s best for you.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
The real answer is for everyone to stop being so precious about false concepts like national identity, historic culture and whatever other claptrap and realise that we are all human beings. These are exactly the same areguments that come up when people debate gay marriage, Mexican imigration into the US or whatever other NIMBY issue you want to pick.
The lines on the map have moved countless times over the years and with the globalisation afforded by the information age these ideas are totally outdated.
No the real answer is to not let dreamy eyed idiots like you anywhere near control of a nations government. It is because of fools like you pursuing your dreamy idealism while ignoring facts on the ground that Europe has big problems coming.
The big problem with people like you is you have no loyalty. Because you have no loyalty you can’t understand it in others. Because you don’t have the necessary frame of referrence to deal with others who do, people like you are very dangerous. The British government is run by people like you.[/quote]
What a ridiculous statement. I have plenty of loyalty, I am loyal to my employer (up to a point) I am loyal to my family, I am loyal to my friends who have shown loyalty to me.
The difference is that unlike you my loyalty is based on reciprocal respect, not the colour of people’s skin, their social standing or the religion they choose to follow.
Unfortunately the world is still filled with small minded biggots like you who have a totally outmoded clan mentality.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu is also a staunch supporter of a UK political organisation with proven links to Neonazi Paramilitary groups which is headed by Holocaust deniers.
You are so pathetic. Because I have made mincemeat out of you in numerous debates all you can now do is resort to character assassination.
You are the resident Tory/Labour sympathizer. It was a Tory government that refused to allow Jews fleeing Nazi persecution entry into their traditional homeland in what was then called Palestine. Hitler used this refusal to take the Jews as justification for the final solution. The Tories made that situation far more deadlier for the Jews than it needed to be.
Or how about how a Labour government took a third of India and gave just gave it to biggotted hateful Islam? There are over a hundred million Sikhs, but because of Labour they have to apply for permission from muslims to be able to visit their holy city because it is now in Pakistan.[/quote]
Really, please link to the debates where you have done anything other than whine on about white good, brown bad.
You call me a Tory / Labour symapthiser without realising that is like calling someone a Republican / Deomcrat sympathiser. In no way do I sympathise with the Labour party, I have never voted for them and feel that their underlying rason detre is now outmoded. I have voted Tory in the past through lack of a more viable option but see a huge number of issues with the thinking that makes up the shadow cabinet. You then point out two bad decisions in British politics that were taken under two different parties. What is your point? I could give you bad decisions that were made by Whigs. What would that prove? Nothing more than the fact that politicians make bad decisions all the time regardless or party.
Please don’t show up your ignorance of history again, we have seen again and again that you don’t even understand the history in your own country so please don’t start taking your idiocy global. Yes it was a bad idea, Mountbatten said as much at the time to the local leaders, however there was really no choice. If the country had not been partitioned by the British there would have been a civil war. The outcome was inevitable, the British were just trying to save face.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
lixy wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
All right Sifu:
I cut some corners. Religion is not race. And if you don’t want me to call it scaremongering, then all right, I won’t.
My problem with these kinds of demographic “They will overwhelm us” arguments is that it leads to no good solutions.
Just so you know whom you’re dealing with, Sifu advocates discriminating on religious grounds when granting visas and residencies, sending all Muslims “home” (whatever that means). When I asked him what can be done about the second/third/fourth/fifth generations, he proposed building detention camps and locking the Muslims in there.
That’s when I stopped replying to him.
You stopped replying to me is because I repeatedly owned your ass by pointing out all your contradictions and lies.
What I advocate is reciprocity in dealing with muslims. ie Saudi Arabia isn’t letting it’s millions of migrant workers become citizens and setup houses or worship for faiths other than islam. Even though Saudi Arabia is building mosques all over Europe. Dubai isn’t giving it’s millions of migrant workers citizenship either, because the migrants would outnumber them.
The muslim world is hateful to outsiders where it is quite common for non muslims to be murdered. It is suicide to keep importing and harboring that kind of hatred into our country thereby expaning their territory.
It is not fair that in order to give muslims a new home to live in outside of their own fucked up countries we have to be subjected to terrorist atacks and have our hard won civil liberties and freedoms eroded because of their presence.
Contrary to what Lixy has written what I proposed was deporting the muslims back to their country of origin and giving the ones who were born in the west the option of going back to their ancestral homeland. Only the ones who refused to go or who couldn’t go would need to be put in internment camps. [/quote]
So at root you support concentration camps for British born muslims.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu wrote:
PB-Crawl wrote:
Sifu wrote:
PB-Crawl wrote:
Sifu wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
If you think banning hats will do anything to ebb this, well you should apply for a position in the obama admin.
I’m not saying their treatment is ok in anyway or that these “men” should be free to act that way, I just don’t think transferring misogyny from one culture to the next is any logical way to deal with it. These women’s freedom is being denied either way.
It is amazing the attitude that many of you are bringing to this issue. The burqa is part of a culture that sees nothing wrong with human trafficing. The suggestion that this is a matter of choice for muslim women is bullshit.
The burqa is a portable prison cell where the public does not know what is going on behind that mask. It is a tool for abusers to get away with abusing women.
Forcing someone to wear a burqa is wrong. The issue however is not the burqa, it is allowing someone or a group to force someone else to do something against their will. Banning the burqa doesn’t fix that issue.
If banning the burqa is wrong would a British muslim woman say she wishes Britain would follow the french lead? You liberals will be the death of liberalism.
Why I, as a British Muslim woman, want the burkha banned from our streets
By Saira Khan
Shopping in Harrods last week, I came across a group of women wearing black burkhas, browsing the latest designs in the fashion department.
The irony of the situation was almost laughable. Here was a group of affluent women window shopping for designs that they would never once be able to wear in public.
Yet it’s a sight that’s becoming more and more commonplace. In hardline Muslim communities right across Britain, the burkha and hijab - the Muslim headscarf - are becoming the norm.
In the predominantly Muslim enclaves of Derby near my childhood home, you now see women hidden behind the full-length robe, their faces completely shielded from view. In London, I see an increasing number of young girls, aged four and five, being made to wear the hijab to school.
Shockingly, the Dickensian bone disease rickets has reemerged in the British Muslim community because women are not getting enough vital vitamin D from sunlight because they are being consigned to life under a shroud.
Thanks to fundamentalist Muslims and ‘hate’ preachers working in Britain, the veiling of women is suddenly all-pervasive and promoted as a basic religious right. We are led to believe that we must live with this in the name of ‘tolerance’.
And yet, as a British Muslim woman, I abhor the practice and am calling on the Government to follow the lead of French President Nicolas Sarkozy and ban the burkha in our country.
The veil is simply a tool of oppression which is being used to alienate and control women under the guise of religious freedom.
My parents moved here from Kashmir in the 1960s. They brought with them their faith and their traditions - but they also understood that they were starting a new life in a country where Islam was not the main religion.
My mother has always worn traditional Kashmiri clothes - the salwar kameez, a long tunic worn over trousers, and the chador, which is like a pashmina worn around the neck or over the hair.
When she found work in England, she adapted her dress without making a fuss. She is still very much a traditional Muslim woman, but she swims in a normal swimming costume and jogs in a tracksuit.
I was born in this country, and my parents’ greatest desire for me was that I would integrate and take advantage of the British education system.
They wanted me to make friends at school, and be able to take part in PE lessons - not feel alienated and cut off from my peers. So at home, I wore the salwar kameez, while at school I wore a wore a typical English school uniform.
Now, to some fundamentalists, that made us not proper Muslims. Really?
I have read the Koran. Nowhere in the Koran does it state that a woman’s face and body must be covered in a layer of heavy black cloth. Instead, Muslim women should dress modestly, covering their arms and legs.
Many of my adult British Muslim friends cover their heads with a headscarf - and I have no problem with that.
The burkha is an entirely different matter. It is an imported Saudi Arabian tradition, and the growing number of women veiling their faces in Britain is a sign of creeping radicalisation, which is not just regressive, it is oppressive and downright dangerous.
The burkha is an extreme practice. It is never right for a woman to hide behind a veil and shut herself off from people in the community. But it is particularly wrong in Britain, where it is alien to the mainstream culture for someone to walk around wearing a mask.
The veil restricts women. It stops them achieving their full potential in all areas of their life, and it stops them communicating. It sends out a clear message: ‘I do not want to be part of your society.’
Every time the burkha is debated, Muslim fundamentalists bring out all these women who say: ‘It’s my choice to wear this.’
Perhaps so - but what pressures have been brought to bear on them? The reality, surely, is that a lot of women are not free to choose.
Girls as young as four are wearing the hijab to school: that is not a freely made choice. It stops them taking part in education and reaching their potential, and the idea that tiny children need to protect their modesty is abhorrent.
And behind the closed doors of some Muslim houses, countless young women are told to wear the hijab and the veil. These are the girls who are hidden away, they are not allowed to go to university or choose who they marry. In many cases, they are kept down by the threat of violence.
The burkha is the ultimate visual symbol of female oppression. It is the weapon of radical Muslim men who want to see Sharia law on Britain’s streets, and would love women to be hidden, unseen and unheard. It is totally out of place in a civilised country.
Precisely because it is impossible to distinguish between the woman who is choosing to wear a burkha and the girl who has been forced to cover herself and live behind a veil, I believe it should be banned
President Sarkozy is absolutely right to say: ‘If you want to live here, live like us.’
He went on to say that the burkha is not a religious sign, ‘it’s a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement… In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity.’
So what should we do in Britain? For decades, Muslim fundamentalists, using the human rights laws, have been allowed to get their own way.
It is time for ministers and ordinary British Muslims to say, ‘Enough is enough’. For the sake of women and children, the Government must ban the wearing of the hijab in school and the burkha in public places.
To do so is not racist, as extremists would have us believe. After all, when I go to Pakistan or Middle Eastern countries, I respect the way they live.
Two years ago, I wore a burkha for the first time for a television programme. It was the most horrid experience. It restricted the way I walked, what I saw, and how I interacted with the world.
It took away my personality. I felt alienated and like a freak. It was hot and uncomfortable, and I was unable to see behind me, exchange a smile with people, or shake hands.
If I had been forced to wear a veil, I would certainly not be free to write this article. Nor would I have run a marathon, become an aerobics teacher or set up a business.
We must unite against the radical Muslim men who love to control women.
My message to those Muslims who want to live in a Talibanised society, and turn their face against Britain, is this: 'If you don’t like living here and don’t want to integrate, then what the hell are you doing here? Why don’t you just go and live in an Islamic country?
[/quote]
Captain cut-and-paste to the rescue!
This does nothing to address my point. The law should not restrict your choice of clothing. The law should support people’s rights when they are being opressed. It is as simple as that.
You have posted a story from a Muslim girl who’s family are imigrants showing how well they have integrated into British life. In another post you have said that if this girl didn’t agree to go back to her homeland she should be put in an internment camp and you are the one complaining about contradictions in other people’s arguments.
[quote]aussie486 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Sifu is also a staunch supporter of a UK political organisation with proven links to Neonazi Paramilitary groups which is headed by Holocaust deniers.
You are so pathetic. Because I have made mincemeat out of you in numerous debates all you can now do is resort to character assassination.
110% right.[/quote]
Sifu has repeatedly stated that he supports the BNP. Sifu, please feel free to jump in and denounce the BNP on this thread.
BNP Links to combat 18 BBC News | PANORAMA | Ex-Combat 18 man speaks out
Nick Griffin Holocaust denial BBC News | Programmes | Under the skin of the BNP
so where was I incorrect?
[quote]aussie486 wrote:
Sifu wrote:
lixy wrote:
AlisaV wrote:
I hadn’t known about Samira Bellil or the prevalence of gang-rapes,
For reference, rape is seven times more prevalent per capita in Australia it is in France. It is also six times worse in Canada and twice in the US.
This has already been argued here. Australia also has higher rates of crime reporting for rape.
Actually the real figure is probably quite higher, the muslim rape gangs (those maggots ID themselves as muslims) who operated in NSW, their victims, who were in court were only the tip of the iceberg according to social workers who work in the sexual assault centres in NSW.
Speaking to them in re to rape and domestic violence within the Muslim communilty and they state there is prob only 1-3% are reported to the police, they report these ''communitys'' to be one of of the most dysfunctional and abusive to women and children currently in Australia.
[/quote]
I agree with this, comparing rape figures between countries or between groups in countries is difficult due to the issue of what percentage of rape is actually reported.