Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

God refused to comment on the action other than to state the claim had no merit and that the claimant just expired after mysteriously being eaten by manbearpig. Reports are that Al Gore was at this moment flying to this latest sighting.

dude, i've actually seen last night imaginationland when Al Gore supports the army's decision to nuke Imaginationland and to finish with manbearpig once and for all. And he was serial too!

On the other hand, i've just had the best fething idea EVER!!!
I could sue God for making me be born in a crappy country, with a crappy economy, and some crappy people. Win and make the church pay me 1 million euros, as it's God's legal representative here on Earth. I'm getting fething rich!!!

Howlingmoon wrote:the minor fact that those people have made no attempt in integrate themselves into French society and have instead rioted and howled when France doesn't become the dark age cesspool that they want has -nothing- to do with it right? If they want "home" so bad, they should have stayed home.

To the extent that an entire religion drawn from dozens of countries all came with the same mission of insidious conversion, that's a telling point. To the extent that's it the fantasy of talkback radio callers, it's less convincing.

You can recognise that your home country isn't great and you want out without rejecting the entirety of your culture. You can in fact, leave China because of the corruption and lack of democracy, and still cook Chinese food.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

filbert wrote:It is; however, in a faux-security context, the guise under which this ban is being introduced, a train station is more of a security threat and logical target for terrorists dressed in burkas. If France flat out banned burkas everywhere then they would leave themselves wide open to accusations of racism (more so than they are if the ban is done as a matter of 'security').

That pretty much explains it, I think.

Banning burkhas is discrimination because it specifically targets an item of clothing belonging to a particular racial/religious group, when there are other items of clothing which have the same disguising effect, which are not banned.

It would be fair to ban the wearing of all full face or head covering apparel, including motorcycle helmets, big scarfs balaclava helmets, burkhas and Komuso basket hats, in places where security is an issue.

Most banks in the UK do not allow people in wearing motorcycle helmets.

Now as the muslim here i will weight in...

The Viel, or Hijab, in arabic, is in a sense, like the Jewish Skull cap. Its a symbol of humility toward God, God asks you to cover yourself, not to the extreme that they do, but just don't show your tits, and cover your hair. Not taht bad. In the end, you can't force a woman to wear it. Personaly i think the face mask is a bit too much, but they have a right to wear what they want. Freedom of speech is something that we should all have, and The french gov't is a hypocrocy for doing that.

EDIT: Plus, in the end, these women wnat to wear it. It is their right to express their religiopus beliefs, like my mom wears the Hijab, and they should have it. If the french don't like it because its different, then the gov't is slowed.

I would agree with both Kilkrazy and isthatmycow (WTF? ).

Saying that the mask is a sign of oppresion is a gross over-simplification, and only idiots would take it as that and only that.

@EF - Except that isthatmycow was talking about the Hijab, not the Niqab - but I'm sure you know the difference.


/sarcasm

I reallu wouldn't know the first thing about it. But having lived in the middle east for nearly half my life, I can tell you that both (I think...) are cultural in nature. What that says about thier culture is debatable.

On a less serious note:

I went to school with an Iranian girl. Freshman year she would not allow herself to be seen by men without her head covered. Senior year she was going skinny dipping. Best looking girl I've ever seen.

isthatmycow wrote:Now as the muslim here i will weight in...

The Viel, or Hijab, in arabic, is in a sense, like the Jewish Skull cap. Its a symbol of humility toward God, God asks you to cover yourself, not to the extreme that they do, but just don't show your tits, and cover your hair. Not taht bad. In the end, you can't force a woman to wear it. Personaly i think the face mask is a bit too much, but they have a right to wear what they want. Freedom of speech is something that we should all have, and The french gov't is a hypocrocy for doing that.

EDIT: Plus, in the end, these women wnat to wear it. It is their right to express their religiopus beliefs, like my mom wears the Hijab, and they should have it. If the french don't like it because its different, then the gov't is slowed.

This is very true but I think the French government arent targeting 'moderate' Muslims; it's the 'hardcore' that they are seeking to influence. I dont think any right minded person has a problem with allowing people to wear what they want. It's not the women who chose to wear the veil or head scarf that are the issue; it's getting to the root of the enclaves that force and coerce women to wear the full coverings and beat them if they refuse - that sort of thing should not be present in any so-called democracy. And actually, I think this is kind of a secular argument anyway; if it was a sect of Christianity that beat women up and forced them to cover themselves head to toe and we proposed banning that, would everyone be up in arms? It's only because there is so much friction between Western culture and Islam that the cracks are showing.

The friction is increased by this sort of blatant racial discrimination.

Kilkrazy wrote:The friction is increased by this sort of blatant racial discrimination.

On both sides.

Bah you beat me to it Ahtman! I was going to comment along the same lines; is all too easy to portray Western culture and society as being evil and intolerant and to complain that we don't make the effort to understand Islam, but I would humbly suggest there needs to be an effort on both parts; an effort to welcome and an effort to integrate. Unfortunately, in the UK and many other countries, there seems to be one sided effort, or at least the perception of it, that Muslims want to integrate us and not the other way round.

The burka embraces all skin colors.

Being indoctrinated by the military i freely admit to having a sort of, irrational dislike for Islam, i even read jihadwatch.org, and im well aware it is hideously bias.

The odd thing is, i am intelligent enough to know that it is programming by a government that wanted me to have no hesitation when it came to killing our nations percieved enemies, and yet i dont really seem to mind so much.

I genuinelly believe that Islam is the greatest threat to peace and stability in the world at this moment, and it is the most aggressive and inately misogynistic religion practiced today.

I think the world would be a far far better place without it, i think that its vile combination of aggresive censorship, even to the point of murder (remember Theo) and self promotion are truly disgusting, and i openly appluaud any strong measures that governments take to combat it.

You're painting with a very broad brush there, mattyrm.

If you modify your statements to "Extreme Islam" I think it is nearer the truth.

Careful matty, you will get people crying that not all Islamics are evil.

I really have no problem with other people from other countries wearing, in private and to some extent in public, particular articles of clothing if they are allowed BUT if a particular establishment has banned clothing for things such as security reasons than EVERYONE who enters those places should have to obey.

People are quick to spew "it's discriminatory to make a woman lower her veil when she enters a bank." It's discriminatory to make me take off my motorcycle helmet when I walk into a bank. If I want to walk around wearing a motorcycle helmet on my head that is my right. The fact that I must take it off when I enter a bank is discriminatory. It violates my rights to freedom of expression.

Not to mention if you are a foreigner of any type you should be expected to have to obey the same laws natural born citizens have to obey. Don't like the fact you have to show your face if you are a Muslim woman while you are in one of OUR Federal buildings than either go back to the country you came from or don't do anything requiring a bank (in other words get any paycheck for working deposited directly, bank online, don't have a checking account or debit card) or having to enter any other Federal building such as a courthouse or the DMV or the SSA building.

It's really so simple.

As i said Krazy, im aware that it sounds terrible to make such a polarizing statement, but 4 tours of Iraq/Afghanistan do funny things to your mind.

My rational mind screams at me to turn away from such broadbrush statements, but i just feel like there is a genuine effort being made by governments to cover up the issue.

I honestly believe that there are far more aggresive muslims in Europe than we have been made to believe. I dont think that it is better than we think, i think it is alot worse.

I tend to not really think there is such a thing as a real "moderate" muslim. They havent been really vocal about renouncing the extremist ones have they?

They have never really truly united as a people and absolutely put the issue to bed 100% and said "we utterly renounce any and all terrorist actions.

It seems to me that the majority of muslims are either very insular or very aggressive. At best you seem to get disinterest and veiled apologies that dont really sound very genuine, and at worst you get people willing to kill for their beliefs.

I stand by my statement, i do think that as a whole, that religion is a negative influence on Western Society, and on topic, women wearing big black ninja suits have no place in any society that claims women have identical status to men.

Hey matty, the US and UK have something in common. The liberals and humanitarians over in this country say the same thing, that "Muslims aren't a problem over here. That they are discriminated against unfairly and that they are a peaceful people."

It might only be extremists but with any religion or viewpoint it's on the shoulders of the Muslims who AREN'T extremists to belay the fears of people who don't "get" Islam or who just see the bad these men and women do. The problem is that the ones who aren't terrorists are so outspoken and "extreme" about shoving their viewpoints into peoples faces that not all Muslims are violent, evil people that they look as fanatical and overzealous as the ones blowing gak up. That kind of leaves my view of them soured. Extremist nut that blows stuff up or a Muslim doppleganger of Jesse Jackson? Neither one paints a very good picture of the people they are representing.

@mattyrm

My father still hates Arabs from when he was stationed over there in the 50s, so you are not alone.

@Fateweaver, are you saying that all Islamic people are, or appear to be violent and evil? That's what you seem to be saying.

Fateweaver wrote:
It might only be extremists but with any religion or viewpoint it's on the shoulders of the Muslims who AREN'T extremists to belay the fears of people who don't "get" Islam or who just see the bad these men and women do.

That's completely incorrect, and one of the most ignorant things you've ever said. There is no requirement for people of a given religion to defend their faith from people who want to simplify their lives by lumping people into a single, emotive category. The onus is on you to separate those people who are violent from those who aren't, its really quite simple.

I think i get what FW is saying mate, he is basically agreeing with me when i say that i think that the Muslims who ARENT extemists just dont do a very good job of making us feel warmer towards them, and thats my point, they are not integrating, and this is what is causing the tensions.

I have to say, it is a diffcult thing to classify someone, as following a religion doesnt make you look any different. I say this because i have a good muslim friend, but he in my eyes, isnt actually a muslim.

Basically his parents are, and if he fills in a census form, he would put "Muslim" but he drinks, he smokes, he supports Middlesbrough football club, he doesnt go to any religious meetings or mosques, and he spurned the idea of an arranged marriage and has a white non muslim girlfriend and as a result is a black sheep of sorts to his family.

These "muslims" are fine, but in my eyes, he isnt a muslim.

Proper practicing muslims, who regularly attend mosques and pray 5 times a day, and the ones i am referring too. They really do not properly condemn the extremists in my eyes, and i do think that my polarizing statement is essentially correct.

I think we are in a far worse state than we realise, and they are not integrating successfully at all.

By 'integrating' do you mean 'dressing, acting, and behaving exactly like Westerners'? Because that's what it seems like you mean.

No Dogma, i think i mean mixing with and socialising with and such. I think that kind of thing is very important for a nice stable society, i had an Indian friend when i was at school, and i used to go to his house for tea, have sleep overs, gak like that. His family were very traitional, but they were very nice and his mother became very close friends with mine.

It seems to me that the majority of Muslims in the UK (proper ones, not plaggy muslims like my mate as described above) are very insular, you know, few or no white friends, dont speak much English, dont mix at all with the natives and such. And it is this which causes the issues, people fear them in some way because they dont get the chance to really get to know any of them so they demonise them in their minds.

They think they know them because of what they read in the press, and thats not knowing.

As i stated above as well, i am aware i have a bias regarding this issue, i have a deep rooted distrust of Islam as a whole, and i concede i am not the best man to talk with on this issue because i have an inclination to be less patient than i really should be!

dogma wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:
It might only be extremists but with any religion or viewpoint it's on the shoulders of the Muslims who AREN'T extremists to belay the fears of people who don't "get" Islam or who just see the bad these men and women do.

The onus is on you to separate those people who are violent from those who aren't, its really quite simple.

I remember 911 recovering a car from shelton (our local muslim area). Those non extremist muslims were handing sweets out in the street to celebrate, the planes hitting the towers. Bet that wasn't on the news.

That's dangerously close to hate speech, which is illegal in the UK.

I'm closing this thread now.