Dutch cabinet approves partial ban on Islamic veil in public areas

[BadFish]

i would think that maybe the thinking is if militants are known to the security services (but just at large and not caught) wearing no veil makes it slightly harder for them to go about their business if there is the increased chance they could be recognised by police or security forces in public.

Not fool proof by any means but surely every bit helps to combat these murderers

that should also depend on how much this impinges on the civil liberties of other though, surely?

 

[pastafarian]

that should also depend on how much this impinges on the civil liberties of other though, surely?

civil liberties is a different debate all together

hans kray was commenting if the outcome of the suicide bombers would have been different if they had not been wearing veils

 

[BadFish]

civil liberties is a different debate all together

hans kray was commenting if the outcome of the suicide bombers would have been different if they had not been wearing veils

Yes it is a different debate but one i though was relevant to your last comment about every little helping. Should we do every little thing to help if those things impinge on innocent peoples quality of life?

Hope you are good Pasta and life is treating you well.

 

[pastafarian]

Yes it is a different debate but one i though was relevant to your last comment about every little helping. Should we do every little thing to help if those things impinge on innocent peoples quality of life?

Hope you are good Pasta and life is treating you well.

dont we all suffer a little with quality of life because of the terrorist threat,(extra surveillance,airport security etc).First world problems for us no doubt.
but if your going to ask the question should we do everything possible even if it impinges on quality of life then i would say yes.

Governments wrestle with this dilemma all the time,how far do you push legislation to counter a threat?......do you reach a tipping point where you say enough is enough,i dont want any more gov intrusion into my life,ill live with the risks or do you let them press on
.
In this instance the prime minister of Chad has said the full veil must go to help keep the population safe......i tend to agree with him.

im very well fishy thanks........giving up poker though.......im terrible at it

 

[BadFish]

dont we all suffer a little with quality of life because of the terrorist threat,(extra surveillance,airport security etc).First world problems for us no doubt.
but if your going to ask the question should we do everything possible even if it impinges on quality of life then i would say yes.

Governments wrestle with this dilemma all the time,how far do you push legislation to counter a threat?......do you reach a tipping point where you say enough is enough,i dont want any more gov intrusion into my life,ill live with the risks or do you let them press on
.
In this instance the prime minister of Chad has said the full veil must go to help keep the population safe......i tend to agree with him.

im very well fishy thanks........giving up poker though.......im terrible at it

I think you need to take each decision on its merits. I think the point the point that HKFC was making was that banning the veil will cause a whole load of hassle for a great many people while not making that much difference to terrorist attacks. My worry is that measures like this will either do nothing, or even make things worse rather than improving anything.

Still i know little about the situation in Chad so i what do I know?

Give up poker?? ...... bet you don't

 

[pastafarian]

I think you need to take each decision on its merits. I think the point the point that HKFC was making was that banning the veil will cause a whole load of hassle for a great many people while not making that much difference to terrorist attacks. My worry is that measures like this will either do nothing, or even make things worse rather than improving anything.

Still i know little about the situation in Chad so i what do I know?

Give up poker?? ...... bet you don't

if one terrorist attack was foiled because someone was recognised isnt that a good result?
likewise if militants have their plans disrupted because they cannot travel around with anonymity is that also not a good result?

i know what your views are on this issue.

have a read of what Dr Taj Hargey Imam of the Muslim Educational Centre of Oxford says,obviously i tend to agree with him......i would love to know if you find him spot on or a bit of a maveric oddball.



"Many Muslims have been misled by bogus propanganda from the fundamentalist Wahhabi, Salafi, Deobandi, Tabligh Jamati and Jamati Islami sects that the burqa / niqab is integral to Islam. It is completely untrue: there is no religious mandate for this primitive facial concealment.

The burqa/niqab is an archaic tribal rag that is pre-Islamic and non-Qur'anic, and thus ipso facto un-Muslim. The ludicrous custom of female public anonymity is an imported Saudi-Afghan fad that has a suspicious provenance. This trendy cultural contraption has no authentic Islamic foundation. Facial-masking first originated for aristocratic and sexist reasons in ancient Persia and Byzantium long before the advent of Islam and is currently gaining traction as a result of Saudi petrodollars and Wahhabi sectarianism.

The burqa / niqab should be resisted on compelling theological, social, health, security, gender equality and libertarian grounds so that Britain’s traditional character and identity is preserved. The UK must oppose this latest salvo from theological militants seeking to win the hearts and minds of British Muslims to replicate their warped version of a mythical Arab 7th century society in contemporary Britain.

As integrated British Muslims, we ask HMG to initiate a national debate in Parliament and across the country so that the public cannot be duped by religious zealots falsely claiming that face-masking is Islamic. If it is proscribed on the pilgrimage to Islam's holiest site in Makkah, why do Muslim women wish to wear it on the streets of Britain?

The obsessive fixation by ultra-puritanical fanatics to hide women's faces under the pretext of religion must be exposed as a fallacy. Their chauvinistic mysogyny is nothing but a Trojan shari’ah horse that has to be routed, otherwise it will set a dangerous precedent that will ultimately imperil Britain’s democracy and liberty.

We call upon all thinking British Muslims as well as those of other faiths and none, to join us in extirpating this non-Qur’anic patriarchal control over women. Let us petition the government and inundate our Members of Parliament to do the right thing to finally outlaw this alien cultural monstrosity from Britain's shores and consign it to the dustbin of history.

So, in this holy month of Ramadan, let us all work together to get rid of this unholy mask that only serves to taint Islam and disparage Muslims. If women wish to hide their hair that's fine, but if they want to conceal their faces, that is another matter because no one has the right to public anonymity."

 

[BadFish]

I think your 'if' is a fairly big one, although the Chad government obviously think it will do some good.

Plastering at the moment but I will give that a read a bit later.

 

[BadFish]

if one terrorist attack was foiled because someone was recognised isnt that a good result?
likewise if militants have their plans disrupted because they cannot travel around with anonymity is that also not a good result?

i know what your views are on this issue.

have a read of what Dr Taj Hargey Imam of the Muslim Educational Centre of Oxford says,obviously i tend to agree with him......i would love to know if you find him spot on or a bit of a maveric oddball.



"Many Muslims have been misled by bogus propanganda from the fundamentalist Wahhabi, Salafi, Deobandi, Tabligh Jamati and Jamati Islami sects that the burqa / niqab is integral to Islam. It is completely untrue: there is no religious mandate for this primitive facial concealment.

The burqa/niqab is an archaic tribal rag that is pre-Islamic and non-Qur'anic, and thus ipso facto un-Muslim. The ludicrous custom of female public anonymity is an imported Saudi-Afghan fad that has a suspicious provenance. This trendy cultural contraption has no authentic Islamic foundation. Facial-masking first originated for aristocratic and sexist reasons in ancient Persia and Byzantium long before the advent of Islam and is currently gaining traction as a result of Saudi petrodollars and Wahhabi sectarianism.

The burqa / niqab should be resisted on compelling theological, social, health, security, gender equality and libertarian grounds so that Britain’s traditional character and identity is preserved. The UK must oppose this latest salvo from theological militants seeking to win the hearts and minds of British Muslims to replicate their warped version of a mythical Arab 7th century society in contemporary Britain.

As integrated British Muslims, we ask HMG to initiate a national debate in Parliament and across the country so that the public cannot be duped by religious zealots falsely claiming that face-masking is Islamic. If it is proscribed on the pilgrimage to Islam's holiest site in Makkah, why do Muslim women wish to wear it on the streets of Britain?

The obsessive fixation by ultra-puritanical fanatics to hide women's faces under the pretext of religion must be exposed as a fallacy. Their chauvinistic mysogyny is nothing but a Trojan shari’ah horse that has to be routed, otherwise it will set a dangerous precedent that will ultimately imperil Britain’s democracy and liberty.

We call upon all thinking British Muslims as well as those of other faiths and none, to join us in extirpating this non-Qur’anic patriarchal control over women. Let us petition the government and inundate our Members of Parliament to do the right thing to finally outlaw this alien cultural monstrosity from Britain's shores and consign it to the dustbin of history.

So, in this holy month of Ramadan, let us all work together to get rid of this unholy mask that only serves to taint Islam and disparage Muslims. If women wish to hide their hair that's fine, but if they want to conceal their faces, that is another matter because no one has the right to public anonymity."

Very interesting that Pasta. Undoubtably the best reason for changing laws that I have read. Sadly though this is not how the debate is currently being framed and the discussion is not presented as helping Muslims but rather painting them as the enemy. This is where the problem is for me.

I think wearing the things is nuts to be honest I don't get religion and all that goes with it. However if you are telling people that they can't dress as they want because some people who share their beliefs may use the dress in acts of terrorism you are inferring that they cannot be trusted and are part of the problem. This to me, in the current climate is a dangerous thing to do.

 

[sydney]

goodness me.....the burqa , niqab has been identified as a security risk....are you saying that it isn't ,it would be just as easy for a white , non muslim trouble maker to evade identification by wearing a burqa or a crash helmet all the time, the fact that you are requested to remove your crash helmet when entering a garage , bank , pub should make this obvious.