It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Burka Rage -- Female Lawyer Rips Veil off Muslim woman

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2010 @ 12:12 AM
link   
She being a lawyer should know better than to take law in own hands.
I do not question the banning of burqa in France but certainly, I don't condone what this French woman did either. It was outrageous.




posted on May, 19 2010 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Don't call me 'buddy'

and do not attempt to score points on a poster you feel has the weight of the crowd against her

As for study --- get busy, instead of proferring grandstanding and unsolicited advice



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 12:19 AM
link   
In the past few days in one of the UK online news sources, there was a feature article about a woman in the UK who's made a career for herself designing the 'Clayton's burqua', i.e., the burqua you wear when you don't want to appear to be wearing a burqua

Photos accompanying the article illustrate the 'new burqua'

These range from a 'dracula' type raised collar to an asian collarless, button up fronted jacket

all sorts of things. None of them remotely like the hideous looking burquas afflicting those nations stupid enough to accept hoardes of fundamentalist muslims without first establishing the ground rules

And one very interesting fact emerged from the feature article about non-burqua-buquaqs --- which is --- NO WHERE in Islamic religious texts does it instruct muslim women to wear the burqua

So saith the buqua-fashionista and the news source in question


Repeat: muslim women are NOT required by their religion to wear the burqua

and many muslim women wouldn't be seen dead in one because it would mark them as ignorant, unschooled, uncultured and backwards



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xtrozero
When they bring the Burka to France they bring everything else, or is it now just a fashion statement?

Should it be my business whether you wear boxer shorts or briefs ?
think not , and spare me any details.
One thing for sure, we can all do without a bigot brigade.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by ToneDeaf
 


Host countries can and should expect immigrants (who leap at the chance to grab welfare, free housing, education and all the other goodies they can't earn at home) to conform with the host population

Those unprepared to conform need not apply

Those who make a POINT of not conforming must expect and accept the consequences



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ToneDeaf

Originally posted by Xtrozero
When they bring the Burka to France they bring everything else, or is it now just a fashion statement?

Should it be my business whether you wear boxer shorts or briefs ?
think not , and spare me any details.
One thing for sure, we can all do without a bigot brigade.


You might be right that my experiences in the Middle East has made me a bigot. I'm not sure myself, but I do know I care little about the Muslin religion, but I do respect their devotion to it. What I do care about, and I really can't tell much difference between culture or religion with the strong devotion they have, is the treatment of women over there. For most women there the burka is not a choice, and that represents non-choices in all aspects of their lives.

I wish it was something as simple as boxer shorts.


As I said, I disagree with the actions of the lawyer, but I can understand where her rage might have come from.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dock9
reply to post by ToneDeaf
 


Host countries can and should expect immigrants (who leap at the chance to grab welfare, free housing, education and all the other goodies they can't earn at home) to conform with the host population

Those unprepared to conform need not apply

Those who make a POINT of not conforming must expect and accept the consequences

What does one have to do with the other ? (welfare vs veil ?)
Are you saying that an arrangement of sorts, as a paying john
deserves submissive servitude ? Lol, your pith-hat must be on too tight.
Are you also saying that my highly educated Muslim doctor needs to conform to your beliefs because ?
As I said. we all can do without a bigot brigade.
btw, you mentioned immigrants, but what does that have to
do with born citizens ? Can born citizens have a choice as whether
to wear boxers or briefs, veils, baggy pants,
the goth-look ? get over it, people are entitled to freedom of expression
and belief, regardless of what any one else thinks.



[edit on 19-5-2010 by ToneDeaf]

[edit on 19-5-2010 by ToneDeaf]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dock9
Muslims can have as much freedom of religion and expression as they're able to achieve for themselves ---- over there. In their own lands.


What if the woman was born in France?

What if a woman in the US elects, of her own free will, to wear the garment?

Then what?

You want to violate her rights to her own freedom of expression?



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


They've passed and are passing laws against the wearing of the burqua in public

Had you heard ?

They're passing such laws due to overwhelming demand by the HOST communities

ATS isn't even a drop in the ocean by comparison

Yes, I believe host populations are entitled to demand certain standards


Of more interest however is this ---- do you support the jailing, beating, defamation and other 'punishments' levied on Westerners *BY* muslim regimes in traditionally muslim nations when those Westerners --- as TOURISTS, not welfare grabbing immigrants --- are accused of 'offending' Islam by behaviours, modes of attire, etc. even if those 'offences' consist of a woman kissing her husband briefly in public ?

Huh ?


.


[edit on 19-5-2010 by Dock9]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Did you miss this part? The lawyer attacked her first, the other woman defended herself.



An argument followed during which the older woman is said to have ripped the veil off, before the Muslim woman allegedly punched her.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by niteboy82
 

You were all set to accuse the Lawyer of assault, and many did, when the lawyer was exercising her right to free speech. The Muslim woman, exercising her endangered right to wear a burqa, took issue with the right to free speech and instigated the physical assault.


According to the article, the lawyer turned the argument physical, not the Muslim woman.

An argument followed during which the older woman is said to have ripped the veil off, before the Muslim woman allegedly punched her.


If so, the Muslim woman was simply practicing her freedom of religion and speech until her burqa was forcibly removed from her, causing her to act in self defense. You can not put your hands on somebody and not expect them to return the favor.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon
Why do some people get so hot and bothered at what others choose to do, if that choice does not affect them in any way what-so-ever? Who cares if this women or any other women wants to wear a burqa? How does it affect you or anyone else? Shouldn't people be worrying about themselves instead of others, especially when they have their own obvious shortcomings? Jeez people, worry about yourselves and not what choice of clothing your neighbor chooses to wear!

--airspoon



I see people with them quite often at my school. It doesn't bother me.

In high school, there were many somalian refugees that attended.. And the females always dressed what seemed traditionally besides the different culture. To my knowledge no one ever had a problem with it.

Doesn't really bother my what others do unless they try to get in my face about it.. And there's no way one could on this issue.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 01:27 AM
link   
To JohnnySeed and Albatross


Guess we should expect more retaliation along these lines by Western HOST nations

when the delightful media is so intent upon informing those Western HOST nations about the lashings, jailings, spittings, defamations and other 'punishments' levied upon Western TOURISTS (as opposed to welfare-grabbing muslim immigrants) for 'offending' muslim sensibilities by wearing 'evil Western holiday clothes which expose a few inches of arm or ankle' or for kissing their spouse in hallowed muslim nations, huh ?



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 


I'm having trouble finding your logic. Are you saying that because some Muslims in countries-that-are-not-France treat some people poorly, this French lawyer is justified in treating a random Muslim woman poorly?



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 




do you support the jailing, beating, defamation and other 'punishments' levied on Westerners *BY* muslim regimes in traditionally muslim nations when those Westerners --- as TOURISTS, not welfare grabbing immigrants --- are accused of 'offending' Islam by behaviours, modes of attire, etc. even if those 'offences' consist of a woman kissing her husband briefly in public ?


It is important to be aware of local law and custom. Is a woman arrested in a muslim nation for kissing her husband in public in any different position than a french tourist in america who has sex with a 15 year old?

Both are engaging in behaviors that are legal in their home country.



do you support


I don't really support the notion of central government. So do I support these punishments? No. But I also recognize that expecting everyone to abide by my own personal standards isn't reasonable.

Claiming that it's proper and decent to expect a woman to cover her breasts while simultaneously claiming that it's immoral and oppressive to expect her to cover her face seems narrow minded to me. Where I live, a woman walking around topless can be arrested for indecent exposure. In some parts of the world, a woman walking around with her face exposed can be arrested for the same.

Are these not all arbitrary lines?

I'm not suggesting we allow everything, or prohibit anything...I'm not suggesting any particular range of what is or isn't acceptable. I'm simply suggesting we accept that not everybody agrees, and that it's basically reasonable for people of like mind to live together.

Conflict may result when people with vastly different views interact. If muslims want women to be covered, there's nothing "evil" about that, any more than americans wanting their women's breasts covered. Call it personal aesthetics.

It may be easier if people with such different views simply choose not to live near each other.




[edit on 19-5-2010 by LordBucket]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyTHSeed
 


I suspect you understand my logic ALL TOO WELL


But it doesn't further the AGENDA ... does it ?


But just in case you genuinely do not understand, I'll go into more detail for you


The media frequently details cases where Western PAYING TOURISTS are grabbed by muslim agencies and JAILED

The reasons offered are that the Western TOURIST has 'offended Islam' by wearing normal holiday clothing --- such as shorts, sleeveless tops, slacks, bare-head, etc. in the very hot weather

Other Western TOURISTS or temporary visitors to muslim lands are JAILED and defamed as 'immoral' and also accused of 'offending Islam' for the alleged 'crime' of giving their husband a peck on the cheek in public

The muslim nations who levy these charges against Westerners make an immense hue and cry about the alleged 'crimes against Islam'. They often declare the 'offender' will be jailed for many years

Other Westerners are LASHED PUBLICLY for 'offending Islam'

So you'd imagine .... wouldn't you ... that muslims who are begging and buying and hiding under school buses in their eagerness to get to the West ---- would be more than ordinarily AWARE of the penalties for 'offending' the beliefs, cultures and mores of other nations ?

But no. Instread, these 'easily offended' muslim migrants decide ' Oh, to hell with these Western infidel HOSTS of ours. Stuff them. Who cares what THEY think. We're going to continue our deplorablely ignorant and misogynistic behaviours right in our HOSTS' faces ! What can they do, after all, LOL. They're just stupid Christians. They HAVE to tolerate anything anyone does to them. They're white. So that means they OWE us. They're programmed to feel GUILTY on behalf of all non-whites. They HAVE to let us get away with blue murder, because that's their self-defeating culture. LOL. What a bunch of idiots and patsies ! And even their corrupt politicians force them to BOW to us ! What fun ! Let's really grind those Western noses in it. Because the system is engineered to put them ALWAYS in the wrong, LOL '

Well think again. Think again .....



.




[edit on 19-5-2010 by Dock9]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by airspoon
 


I have no problem at all understanding liberty or freedom.

I just also understand that tolerance has necessary, yes, NECESSARY limits.

If you tolerate oppression, you lose freedom. Its not complicated. We are allowed to learn from history. And historically, when existing groups have been tolerant of and accepting of groups who do not reciprocate tolerance, the tolerant groups end up being overrun.

It is no coincidence that fanatic, violent and oppressive MINORITIES are able to seize control of more moderate majorities. There is a dynamic working there. What do you think that is? Could it be that non-reciprocal tolerance is bad for the tolerant? Could it be that altruism is only viable if offered discriminately?

There is actually a growing body of work on why that is so. On why paradoxically in order for kindness, cooperation and altruism to flourish it is necessary for those extending those behaviors to discriminate against those who do not respond in kind.

It is no accident that the more open pagan religions (who usually didnt see any problem with one more God) were plowed into the ground by the intolerant and more rigid Abrahamic religions. (Who insist on our one God and that God only) There is a dynamic there, and if you were interested in opening your mind, its fascinating study.

But dont assume because you are chanting for freedom that what you propose is actually the sound method of preserving it. History says you are dead wrong.


You're forgetting one thing.

These Muslim women with the burkas...They're living in Western Countries where they do have freedoms.

If they don't want to wear the burka they don't have to. Yeah they're parents might yell at them or something, but that's no different than parents yelling at their teenage girls 50 years ago for wearing skirts above the knee.

If they didn't want to wear the burka, they wouldn't wear it.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 




The media frequently details cases where Western
PAYING TOURISTS are grabbed by muslim agencies and JAILED


Yes, and here's a man who was arrested for materials that any 8 year old boy can buy in japan and read in public without anyone batting an eye.

Standards of "decency" vary. And while you're here decrying westerners jailed in foreign lands, and I don't see you complaining about japanese tourists in america being arrested and deported for carrying some comics with them.

All I can suggest is that if muslim behavior really bothers you so much, if you really find the burka so offensive...outlaw it. Make it illegal in your home country. Make it formal and known and understood, so muslims can be aware that it will be a problem.

And if they violate that law, then deal with them accordingly.

But don't babble on about freedom and then freak out when somebody makes a choice that isn't the choice you want them to make.


[edit on 19-5-2010 by LordBucket]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 02:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Dock9
 


OH NO! THE JIG IS UP! YOU'VE SEEN RIGHT THROUGH ME...

I suspect you understand my logic ALL TOO WELL

But it doesn't further the AGENDA ... does it ?


No really, I'm blushing, it's the first time I've been accused of furthering an agenda. I knew it was only a matter of time, but I never would have guessed it would be the secret plan to turn the WEst in to a slave state of Islam. AAAALALALALALALA

The thing about your examples, are that those countries are sovereign nations - they are within their right to enforce their laws.

If you actually believed in freedom, you would see that these women have the right to wear whatever religious garb they want. There is no guarantee of freedom from being offended by other cultural/religious practice - so long as those cultures are acting within the law.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by ItsAgentScully
I agree with the burqa ban, its a safety hazard.


We should also ban cars. They're far worse.

While we're at it, we should ban working too. And exercise.

All are unsafe.

[edit on 19/5/10 by NuclearPaul]



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join