Get ready for Freedom Sack Rage!
“I need a hijab, to set me free, I need a hijab for my identity, with my Islamic delusion, and my portable seclusion, I’m gonna be, I’m gonna be, I’m gonna beeeeee: such a good, such a good such a good Muzzie…”
- From Sheik Yer’mami’s ‘Muzzie boogie”…
Why not ban full veil, says French government spokesman
Breeders for jihad….
Official’s remarks reignite debate over ability of Sarkozy administration to reconcile secularism with religious diversity
France’s ability to reconcile secularism with religious diversity came under fresh scrutiny today after the government said it would not rule out banning Muslim women from wearing the full Islamic veil.
Five years after a law was passed forbidding children from wearing the headscarf or any other “conspicuous” religious symbol in schools, the government indicated it was prepared to wade into another thorny row over the state’s right to tell individuals what not to wear.
* That’s where the government is wrong: Its not about “the state’s right to tell individuals what not to wear” – its about stopping misogyny, oppression and brainwashing. Its about empowering, liberating illiterate, gullible females. Most of all its about stopping a political movement monster called Islam dead in its tracks./ed
Speaking after a group of MPs requested an inquiry into the “degrading” use of the burka and niqab, government spokesman Luc Chatel said it was important to establish to what extent women’s rights were being compromised by the garments.
“If it were determined that wearing the burka is a submissive act, and that it is contrary to republican principles, naturally parliament would have to drawn the necessary conclusions,” he said. When asked whether that could mean bringing in legislation to ensure an outright ban, Chatel answered: “Why not?”
Although there are no official figures, several thousand women are believed to wear the full veil in France, and their appearance has long caused consternation among the upholders of the country’s staunchly secular values. Last year a Moroccan woman was refused French citizenship after social services found she wore a burka and was living “in total submission” to her husband.
The Communist MP who led the call this week for an inquiry, André Gerin, denounced the garments as walking prisons. In his request, backed by 57 other MPs, mostly from Nicolas Sarkozy’s centre-right UMP party, he said: “The sight of these imprisoned women is already intolerable to us when they come from Iran, Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia … It is totally unacceptable on French soil.”
For a ban to be implemented, an investigation would first have to be opened and its results studied for any sign of incompatibility between secular values and the use of the full veil. President Sarkozy, who recently defended France’s division between the state and religion during a press conference with Barack Obama, is understood to be in favour of the issue being explored.
Sarkozy’s leftwing urban policies secretary, herself a Muslim and former president of a women’s rights group, today gave her support to “a total ban” on the burka. “I am for the banning of this coffin which kills basic freedoms,” Fadela Amara told Le Parisien newspaper. “This debate has to clear the way to a law which protects women.”
This point of view, however, is not shared by everyone. Muslim leaders have urged politicians not to create more tension between communities.
“To raise the subject like this, via a parliamentary committee, is a way of stigmatising Islam and the Muslims of France,” said Mohammed Moussaouni, head of the French Council for the Muslim Faith. He said the full veil remained a marginal choice for most Muslim women, and such a provocative move threatened to alienate those more moderate in their practices.
His plea for the motion to be left alone was echoed by the immigration minister, Eric Besson, who said that, since 2004, France had “managed to strike a balance, and it would be dangerous to call that into question”.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media 2009
{ 12 comments… read them below or add one }
Muslims are going to have to learn to submit to reality. And if that reality means that they have to conform to the laws of the land that they chose to inhabit, then so be it. So burkha off!
* France had “managed to strike a balance …”
What balance is that – 300 torched cars a night instead of 3,000?
They are never without their push chairs…
Off with it. It’s a massive security risk – for who knows *what* might be hiding underneath an ambulatory black sack that conceals everything except a pair of eyes (and sometimes even the eyes are hidden by glasses, or a gauze mesh or screen)? It permits Muslim male criminals to do a flit – and they have used it thus. It permits Muslim females – and males – and enterprising Infidel criminals, too – to commit crimes such as shoplifting, burglary, assault, bank robbery and worse, and evade being identified by security cameras.
Off with it. It should be banned everywhere in the non-Muslim world. And any Muslim who refuses to take it off, or who demands that it be permitted to be worn, should be deported back to dar al Islam – sans any citizenship or residency, of a non-Muslim country, that they have been carelessly permitted to acquire.
If they win this ‘battle’ it will be the first the ‘froggies’ have won since the start of the 19th Century so i don’t hold out mush hope.
I agree with dda. But most of the good citizens in non-Muslim majority countries are clueless and ignorant.
Which is why here (Australia) the one-way traffic will continue without let up.
No way we can kick the no-hopers out.
It seems likely that a major terror attack is planned against the UK – but this should not be “new” information. If such an attack happens then there is more that sufficient reason to deport the relevent “social group” from afflicted countries or to implement more radical measures to safeguard the population. In other words, there is a way to kick the no-hopers out within our system but it comes at a cost.
There may well be sufficient reason to deport the relevant social group from afflicted countries, but when the Serbs tried to do it in Kosovo we know what happened. To imagine that mass removal of Muslim communities is a realistic proposition is (in my opinion) fanciful/ wishful thinking.
The communities in question are not that large at present – certainly of order 6-8 percent of national populations. It is probably wishful thinking because the authorities will stonewall – but it is possible and if the need becomes sufficiently severe it will be done. One example – interment of civilians in USA during WW2. The numbers were smaller but the mechanics to achieve required objective remains essentially unchanged with the additional requirement of some dedicated armed resource if trouble rears its head – as it will – and a mandate to use force appropriately.
The Serbs lost because of UN involvement. The UN has absolutely no influence over USA or Britain or Oz if their internal security is threatened. The UN (or should I say the OIC) can go and play marbles in the courtyard – it will be time more profitably spent.
Where Europe is heading, as islamic immigration & high fertility rates replace the declining native populations – (http://) lifttheveil.org
You are right Mullah – that is why the time frame for action is not large.