Straw infuriates muslim women

Jack Straw - former foreign secretary has caused a storm in his constituency, with regards to his remarks about muslim females wearing veils, while they are visitng him during his constituency surgery.

He has said, muslim women wearing full veils made community relation difficult.

Now come on we have all seen Jack Straw when he speaks. What is his motive behind this?

Former foreign secretary Jack Straw said Muslim women who wore full veils made community relations "more difficult", sparking criticism from Islamic groups who said the comments would cause anger in their communities.

Straw, now Leader of the House of Commons, said a veil was "a visible statement of separation and difference" and that he felt much more comfortable dealing with
people with their faces uncovered.

Source

Does he have every right to trie and tell muslim women what they can and cannot wear. Or has his concerns been misplaced.

This on top of the tensions down near windsor. Things are hotten up.

(edited to fix spellin mistakes)

[edit on 5-10-2006 by spencerjohnstone]

Are we no longer allowed to voice opinions because a few uptight jerks want to through hissy fits at every comment made? Free speach. Puh-leez. Lets all watch out for over sensitive feelings, don't want Muslim women getting their panies in a bunch.

Surely the real question we should be asking is did he really?!

Did Jack Straw (a man renowned for decent attitudes when it comes to people of all faiths - he has after all been an excellent constituency MP in a very mixed area for a very long time, 27yrs, being repeatedly re-elected to the constituency) really 'cause a storm' anywhere
(as opposed to one of those synthetic reported 'storms' which are usually really just the invention of a tabloid editorial meeting room)?

It's a regular truth, quite often we are treated to these claims in some of our papers.
They're happy to go on and on about these instances of "outrage!" supposedly "sweeping the nation" but for some strange reason it completely misses my part of the country and all the people I speak to day in day out.

So, has this really caused "a storm"?

Without exception the Muslim women I saw being interviewed the UK news shows tonight said that there were far more important things to be concerned about and didn't seem particularly 'outraged'.

Consider what Straw actually said.
He called for consideration and debate.
He wasn't "telling" people what they can wear.

The Blackburn MP says the veil is a "visible statement of separation and of difference" and he asks women visiting his surgery to consider removing it.....

....."wearing the full veil was bound to make better, positive relations between the two communities more difficult".

Asking women to consider showing the mouths and noses could lead to true "face-to-face" conversations with constituents, enabling him to "see what the other person means, and not just hear what they say".

He said he made sure he had a female colleague in the room when asking someone to show their mouth and nose - and his constituents had so far always agreed to do so.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Take the Beeb report.
Reported Muslim reaction is totally divided and mixed.

The Islamic Human Rights Commission said the Commons leader's request was selective discrimination.

But the Muslim Council of Britain said it understood Mr Straw's discomfort.

news.bbc.co.uk...

I suspect the unholy alliance is at it again.

Those who will rush to 'take offence' at anything even vaguely connected to Islam (BTW fully covering the female face is not even called for in the Koran)
and
those who love to push this kind of stuff in the hope that the Labour party and/or senior people in it are embarrassed by it or the reaction they claim to it.

Finally you get the ridiculous right-wing nutter types who sieze on this kind of stuff this as some sort of 'proof' that they're right and the different ethnic groups here can never get along in peace.

Respectful debate is never a threat to anybody and that is all that Jack Straw has begun here; and as a long-term constituency MP and senior member of the Government from such a mixed area it is totally right and proper for him to publicly raise these concerns......particularly as this relates to wider and obvious social unease.

It's quite clear the Muslim community is in dialogue with itself on these matters and it is absolutely appropriate this be conducted in the context of their place in our wider society.

There is nothing shocking or wrong with that......although looking at the headline tone of some comment you really do have to wonder at the motives behind those writing such stuff.



[edit on 5-10-2006 by sminkeypinkey]

Without exception the Muslim women I saw being interviewed the UK news shows tonight said that there were far more important things to be concerned about and didn't seem particularly 'outraged'.

I saw the exact same Muslim women on Sky News and the BBC earlier on she seemed outraged to me, she called it discrimination. Weither against Muslims in general or females.

But I did watch the exact same Muslim Female on Newsnight, and she mostly touched upon the individual female decision or right to wear what they want. Weither it be a veil or not.

Tell you something the last 24 hours the media has went O.T.T. with all of this. Again sensationalisin all of this.

Jack Straw has been accused of being selectively discriminating by asking Muslim women if they would remove their veils when they visit his constituency surgery.

Three people are being questioned over a series of attacks on a Muslim-owned dairy in Windsor.

And Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, has ordered an urgent review of a decision to excuse a Muslim officer from guard duties at the Israeli Embassy in London.

NEWSNIGHT SOURCE

This interview Jack Straw had with sky news put a better highlight on this subject. Off what he was trying to say.

Straw Interview

For those interested and who haven't seen what Jack Straw actually said it's here.

The reported claim that he was trying to tell people what to wear is completely false.

I'm not denying that an odd bunch have rushed to publicly claim 'outrage' over this.

What I do wonder is if there really is such widespread 'outrage' in the community (both Muslim and generally) as claimed.

BTW Catherine Hossain (the young British-born Muslim woman doing the rounds of the TV studios last night here ) did not look at all 'outraged' to me.
Check out the 7pm Channel 4 interview for proof here.

Most laughably hypocritical of all has to be the tory comment

The Conservative Party described the remarks as dangerous

link


[edit on 6-10-2006 by sminkeypinkey]

BTW Catherine Hossain (the young British-born Muslim woman doing the rounds of the TV studios last night here ) did not look at all 'outraged' to me.

If you had seen her on Sky news an the BBC news earlier she looked outraged to me.

Maybe Straw is highlighting the concerns being expressed to him by his constituents, while he is meeting him during his constituency surgeries. Maybe he he is doing this so Muslim females are not blamed for it. All speculation supposes.

Btw the remark by the tories is laughable after all they want to bring out a policy where you hugg a hoodie, oh pleaseeeeeee get a grip tories.

Also its been reported in the news, weither you believe them or not, that an islamic group has called his remarks about muslim woman wearing veils as astonishing.

Massoud Shadjareh, of the human rights commission, told the BBC it was "astonishing" that Mr Straw chose to "selectively discriminate on the basis of religion".

Baksedha Khan, 34, of Audley, Blackburn, accused him of using the issue to advance his bid for the deputy leadership of the Labour Party.

She asked: "Why is he making a big issue of this now? Does he have an ulterior motive? I think this is all about his political future and he is looking for publicity."

What has society come to, when we cant even open discussion about other religions? Som much for our culture beibeing intergrated. When we are told by another religion that we cannot criticise or ask open questions with regards to their religion or dress code.

Weither you agree with Straw or not, maybe there should be an open debate about whats going on in the communities in the UK.

Source



[edit on 6-10-2006 by spencerjohnstone]

I see nothing wrong with wanting to the see the face of the person your talking to, eye contact and facial expression is an important part of communication, we listen with our eyes as well as our ears.

The full body covering and the covering of the face isn't widely practised in Islam, while not personally that knowledgeable about the Koran I believe it states women should be modest in their appearance, the full covering and in some cases a full face covering is a radical interpretation and not representative of Islam as a whole.

Its all about culture and our opinion on aspects of different cultures, I have the right to say I don't like aspects of other cultures and they have the right not to agree, and anyone who says I shouldn't openly disagree with another culture because I’m being oppressive or don't understand should simply shush.

Because there are plenty on both sides, the very defensive Muslims who would use this to show that people are not respecting their faith and those on the radical right wing who would ramble on about how Muslims get special treatment and are taking over the country.

Both full of rubbish.

Oh, and I agree the media has blown this out of proportion as usual, what do you really expect?

Just out of interest, how does this work with things like police interviews and the likes?

As an ex copper, i know how important seeing a persons body language can be when interviewing someone, especially thier facial expressions.

Jack Straw did say that he "preferred" them to uncover thier faces though and if they really did'nt want to it would'nt be a major issue. I can't see what the fuss is about?

I remember when me and my mates were due to go to Iraq the first time round, we had to spend so much time learning about the different culture and what was and was'nt accepted, or even what was considered coureous in that country so we could get on better with the locals.

Whats wrong with other cultures doing the same over here? There seems to be no give and take. We live in a country that has so many different religions and cultures, why not comprimise a little and make it easier to live together for gods sake!

Anyway back to the topic in hand, i'm sure this will give many people a reason to make a mountain out of a molehill and we'll see another outcry taken to the exteme.

Hey we might even see a fatwa issued.....they seem to be issued for everything else these days!

CX.

Just out of interest, how does this work with things like police interviews and the likes?

In the UK?

They dont have a choice, I think. They have to remove the Veil, while they are being interviewed.

Alot of hooplah over nothing.

He has not told anyone what to wear. He simply stated that he asks his female muslim constituents to remove the veil when they come to speak with him. The veil. Not the hijab. hes not asking them to strip naked and give him lap dances. he simply would like to be able to see their faces when communicating with them. Its a western thing, you know. In western cultures, it is considered rude to cover ones face when talking to another person. We communicate through our facial expressions more than we comminicate with our words. Its a reasonable request.

Besides, many Muslim women in alot of Muslim countries do not wear veils. They wear baggy loose concealing clothing and headscarves to preserve their modesty. The veil is associated with the much more extreme, conservative Islamic ideas. Thus, it boggles my mind why Muslim women living in the west would choose to wear veils. If they want to practice the more extreme forms of islam, they can find many other places to live.

The hijab, or headscarf, however, is far more acceptable in both cultures. It maintains modesty, thus keeping Muslim patriarchs happy, while it still shows the face, so that westerners are not offended.

In the west, a concealed face sends out very negative messages. In the west, when one conceals their face, it is usually associated with criminal activity or underhanded dealings. Like bankrobbers or criminals. In Muslim countries, women walking around in short skirts and tight clothes are seen as loose whores, showing flesh and distracting or tempting men.

Tolerance is a two way street. Both sides must meet halfway. I do not expect Muslim women to dress like non Muslim Brits in revealing clothing, or anything else. I have no objections to hijabs or abayahs or any form of headscarf on Muslim women. They maintain their modesty, and yet their faces are visible so that when speaking to them, you can have honest two way communication.

I do not think Straw was being unreasonable.

Thinly Veiled

Originally posted by spencerjohnstone
If you had seen her on Sky news an the BBC news earlier she looked outraged to me.

If her face was covered, how could you tell?

If not, why should she be outraged?

The storm is in the media. The Storm is not in the Muslim Community. The debate we're seeing now is a common one, it has been happening in Europe for decades now. It happens all over the Middle East - does nobody study history now? Do you not remember Mohammad Reza Pahlavi? Do people not remember Iran between 1950 and 1970?

Well it made its way to the top of the British Brainwashing Commissions evening news. Next we were treated to how an Asian woman had killed two of her own children, then there was something about someone not wanting to guard the Israeli embassy because he’s from Lebanon and they were bombing his country.

Personally I have to say the Met was quite wrong to remove him from his post…
He should have stayed there so that if a terrorist did come along, they could at least kill half the Israeli civilian staff before the policeman sounded the alarm.
In fact I think it’s a good idea if only people from Hamas can guard the Israeli embassy; and if people from Hamas (with relatives in the Middle East) don’t like guarding the Israeli embassy they should ether not join the police force, or just shut up (and not do their job!!!)

So you see it’s pretty clear that someone(s) amongst the media chat rooms, and networks has decided it would be a good idea if we could make all things anti Muslim, top of the agenda.
In my opinion, pro-Israel (coincidently Jewish) Jack Straw is only playing his part in that big scheme of things. I mean what a stupid thing to be saying? So clearly there’s more going on.

Basically I too like to see the person I'm speaking too but that’s not what I see when I see Jack Straw.

Then again (taking it at face value) if I supported Jack’s proposal, I would go for the “democratic approach” where local councils ask woman to take of their veils. You know at bus stations and public seats how they have those “no drinking signs”, perhaps they could also have one for the veil?
Of course doing it at a local level would mean there’s always somewhere where the Muslims can move to, this would less harsh than a nationwide ban. And of course (perhaps with petrol bombs throwing) there would good room for local debate (and hence increased interest in local politics).
The fact the local approach ridicules the idea as much as the national one helps expose how ridiculous the idea actually is.

In the meantime (being the freeborn English citizen I am) if I see a Muslim woman and I want her take of her veil I will ask. But frankly because so many of their women are (to my eyes) ugly I wouldn’t. The veil after all is there for a reason. (So let them pass).

Seems to me that this is a whole lot of nothing. I too am more comfortable being able to look at someone when I'm talking to them. Further it appears he asked not demanded. Once again the media has taken a comment out of context to make it appear worse then it actually is.

Originally posted by Liberal1984
Personally I have to say the Met was quite wrong to remove him from his post…

- It's just another synthetic case and another story that's making the media because of the Officer's Muslim religion.

It has been completely over-looked that the Met. Police have admitted that they have sometimes done this before in the case of a non-Muslim Officers.

A Scotland Yard spokeswoman added: "On occasions and for a variety of reasons, an officer may ask to be moved with a specific command. Every case is considered separately, balancing the needs of the MPS against those of the individual and the role which he or she is asked to perform.
Cases are kept under review.

www.guardian.co.uk...

He should have stayed there so that if a terrorist did come along, they could at least kill half the Israeli civilian staff before the policeman sounded the alarm.

- Was that funny in your own head?

Trivialise this all you like lib but the Muslim Police Officer that was moved had asked to be moved because he has family out in the ME and he was afraid for them or that they might be threatened because of the job he was going to be doing, not because of his own personal beliefs or views.

In fact I think it’s a good idea if only people from Hamas can guard the Israeli embassy; and if people from Hamas (with relatives in the Middle East) don’t like guarding the Israeli embassy they should ether not join the police force, or just shut up (and not do their job!!!)

- Maybe drinking heavily before posting isn't such a good idea lib.

So you see it’s pretty clear that someone(s) amongst the media chat rooms, and networks has decided it would be a good idea if we could make all things anti Muslim, top of the agenda.

- You'd have to be determinedly blinkered to ignore the fact that the ME, Muslims and community relations (particularly in view of the 7/7 attacks) is very 'newsworthy' right now.

In my opinion, pro-Israel (coincidently Jewish) Jack Straw is only playing his part in that big scheme of things. I mean what a stupid thing to be saying? So clearly there’s more going on.

- That doesn't follow at all.

JS said, as a long-term constituency MP of 27yrs, that he has noticed 'the full veil' becoming more and more used.
He mentioned that when Muslim women visit him as their local MP he asks them if they would mind removing the veil so he can see their facial expressions and communicate more clearly and accurately with them.
He also said that he sees this increasing use of the full veil as a symptom of increasing sectarian separation and that this worried him enormously.

Not one of those comments is wrong or insensitively put or out of bounds for a British MP to raise in the manner he did.

Not one of those concerns heralds anything beyond the proper discussion of the issue they address.

.....and pretending this is just 'an outsider' making mischief jumping in with big size 12 boots into an issue that doesn't concern them is quite wrong.....and in fact that sort of comment unwittingly relates entirely to what JS is actually saying.

As subsequent comments have shown the British Muslim community itself is divided on this matter.

They are part of our community and it is quite proper for this debate to be conducted between us all, even if Muslims have the larger part of that debate as it relates mostly to them and their 'culture'.

I would go for the “democratic approach” where local councils ask woman to take of their veils. You know at bus stations and public seats how they have those “no drinking signs”, perhaps they could also have one for the veil?

- Well if you want to crack on with ridiculous 'jokes' that this is some sort of attempt at a formal and official apartheid-like separation (when that could not be much further from the point) work away.

In the meantime (being the freeborn English citizen I am) if I see a Muslim woman and I want her take of her veil I will ask. But frankly because so many of their women are (to my eyes) ugly I wouldn’t. The veil after all is there for a reason. (So let them pass).

- I think the "ugliness" on view here is pretty apparent to anyone reading this stuff, lib.

Shame you can never quite manage to keep a veil over it at all times, hmmmm?

If her face was covered, how could you tell?

1. Her face was not covered that is how I could tell that she was outraged.

If not, why should she be outraged?

She is outraged by his comments. She seen them as discrimination towards mulim women in general.

I watched the interview with her on the BBC and Sky she looked outraged to me.

Originally posted by spencerjohnstone
Her face was not covered that is how I could tell that she was outraged....

.....I watched the interview with her on the BBC and Sky she looked outraged to me.

- Perhaps she decided to appear more "outraged" as the evening wore on?

Certainly on the Channel 4 news item at 7pm she was smiling and very amiable, not at all what you'd call "outraged".

Make you own mind up.

You can actually watch the item and see her not being very outraged at all here

It's an interesting, if predicable, part of this that yet again the original actual comments have been left behind long ago.

The Commons leader said he did not want to be "prescriptive" but he believed that covering people's faces could make community relations more difficult.

news.bbc.co.uk...

- No-one is telling anybody what to do.
But there is a fair and reasonable debate to be had about the separating effect a growing use of the full veil has on our society as a whole and whether or not 'we' should just sit by and watch this happening without even trying to talk about it.



[edit on 8-10-2006 by sminkeypinkey]

2 more ministers have weighed into this debate over weither its right for muslim women to wear veils or not.

Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott has defended the right of Muslim women to wear veils on the Sunday AM programme.

Scotland's communities minister has criticised Jack Straw's comments on the wearing of veils by Muslim women.

Different views from different members of Straws own party.

This keeps rumblin on and on. Wonder when this is going to end

SOURCE

Ill say it again, when has it become wrong for us as individuals in a society to open discuss our views on other people in the UK. Weither it be with regards to religion or race. Is this country not meant to be a democratic country?

He has a right to say whatever he wants, and as a government official he has a responsibility to do something aobut these things. Women shouldn't be wearing burkhas and covering their faces, its assinine. Given that the UK is having social problems between westerners and muslims, it would make sense for muslims to assimilate in their dress, to a certain extent, that is in keeping with the culture that they've immigrated to. So shawls, turbans, saris, etc, those are all fine, because they are simply other types of dress.

But burkhas and face veils, they are seen as sexist oppression of women. Muslims would do well to 'dress modestly', as they are told too in the koran, by dressing modestly, not by covering up their dentire body and face. THere's no sense in someone saying that a girl in a full length dress, longsleeved turtle neck and head scarf isn't dressing modestly, and I think that that's the sort of dress that would be acceptable to the west. But face veils goes too far.

Clearly Staw is entitled to his opinion, BUT, he has to realize that his statements, on a cultural issue like that, is bound to be taken with more authority than a similar comment by an average guy on the street. His suggesting it can't reasonably be taken as a full legal position of the british government, but it has to be taken seriously.

I think he's right, I'm not allowed to a pub or club with a cap or hoody on, because it covers certain features and offends some people.

These Muslim women cover their hole body and face, if they want to live in a westerners country then they should atleast abide by our ways of living, if they don't like it, go somewhere else. Don't come to other countrys and try to change our ways.