Burka Rage -- Female Lawyer Rips Veil off Muslim woman

It is one of the great ironies of our world today that the very same headscarf revered as a sign of 'holiness' when worn for the purpose of showing the authority of man by Catholic Nuns, is reviled as a sign of 'oppression' when worn for the purpose of protection by Muslim women.

Originally posted by bommer09
I thought this website was about denying ignorance.

It is ignorant to tell somebody what they can or cannot wear.

For God's sake it is her religion!

If her religion told her to walk around naked that's her right. Of course then it wouldn't be about women it would be objectifying them, and everyone would mandate laws that women cover up (oh wait, we already have those in most places..decency laws)

I'm just saying let her wear a head scarf. You know, instead of being totalitarian.

1 - You don't have any right to walk around naked in most societies.

2 - She was wearing a burqa, not a scarf. There is a huge difference.
A bhurqa is a hooded cloak, usually black, which covers everything, even the face, leaving the woman the tiniest slit to peer out of.

reply to post by Armin


The hajib is comparable to the head dress of some Catholic nuns, but which order of nuns wears anything comparable to a burqa?
I was under the impression that nuns were shorn or cover their hair in denial of vanity as a woman's hair is her glory. The uniform is to identify her as a bride of Christ.

reply to post by Dock9


This really makes my blood boil.

What if I campaign to make sure that women can't wear Jeans?
How about I campaign to demand that all men shave off beards immediately?

France is no longer a democratic free nation.

The moment you start introducing laws demonising people and unreasonably restricting what a person can WEAR you no longer have the right to call yourself a democratic nation supporting human rights.

It brings real meaning to the term Fashion Police.

It makes me sick, and it's creating a "guilty until proven innocent" mentality.

SHAME ON YOU FRANCE!

Originally posted by 23refugee
reply to post by Armin

 

The hajib is comparable to the head dress of some Catholic nuns, but which order of nuns wears anything comparable to a burqa?
I was under the impression that nuns were shorn or cover their hair in denial of vanity as a woman's hair is her glory. The uniform is to identify her as a bride of Christ.

So, "the uniform" (veil) that the Mother of Jesus wore, it was to identify herself as a bride to her own son? I am disgusted..

Of course nudity is frowned upon, it's innapropriate in public and ur 'goodies' shouldnt be shown to just anyone, nor should anyone have to be subjected to seeing it. Wearing a Burqa is different and it's hard to not realize that. Are u going to allow someone to tell You how to dress? Pleated pants are soooo out, they should be outlawed. Sox with sandals? Bad taste, should be outlawed. How about nuns? Catholicism irks me, lets outlaw habits. Those Amish, I'm offended by their suits and the Brethren? The women shouldnt have to wear veilings, cant stand that. Ridiculous isnt it? Why? Because NOONE should tell u how u should/shouldnt dress. You cant implement a 'partial ban'. How're u to tell who's wearing them by choice and who's not? It's a govt seeing just how far they can go to control u. On top of it they've got society to go along with it. It's another way to control the masses. Stir the proverbial pot, cause a divide and it's working. If we allow this to happen in France then dont be surprised, dont be pissed when it happens in the U.S. because it will. These women have the right to wear anything they want as long as it causes no harm to another. It all boils down to freedom, personal freedom to express urself anyway u see fit. They're chipping away at Our freedoms and getting away with it....dont be surprised...

Originally posted by Armin
It is one of the great ironies of our world today that the very same headscarf revered as a sign of 'holiness' when worn for the purpose of showing the authority of man by Catholic Nuns, is reviled as a sign of 'oppression' when worn for the purpose of protection by Muslim women.

Nuns have not been blowing people up in Subways.

I think the Burkas should be banned for security reasons let alone what they stand for.

Its high time the Muslims who are living it up in someone else's country stop demanding certain rights and telling others what to deal with. When a foreign woman visits an Arab one she is FORCED to ware a Burka more often than not so we should have the right to demand they NOT ware them in our country.

Good,
Same response I'd have to someone in a Nazi SS uniform.
They represent exactly the same goals, intent, and techniques.

Originally posted by Armin

Originally posted by 23refugee
reply to post by Armin

 

The hajib is comparable to the head dress of some Catholic nuns, but which order of nuns wears anything comparable to a burqa?
I was under the impression that nuns were shorn or cover their hair in denial of vanity as a woman's hair is her glory. The uniform is to identify her as a bride of Christ.

So, "the uniform" (veil) that the Mother of Jesus wore, it was to identify herself as a bride to her own son? I am disgusted..

Actually, I was refering to the somber clothes, just like the preists wear.
If Mary wore one, it was because she was someone's cherished daughter whose purity and modesty were of the utmost importance to her dad. Strange how that worked out, huh?
I don't know if Christians were big on head covering before Paul came along.
Not being religious, I see all these different religious modesty requirements for women as graduations on a scale. If having to cover your head in a house of worship is a 5, having to cover everything in public has got to be a 10.

reply to post by Sky watcher



I agree with you


And it goes further

What is THE most distinguishing visible element of islam in the West ?

Ok -- there are the mosques, which our governments appear eager to force to our attention, despite they are utterly incongruous within Western landscapes

But for the general HOST population, burquas are the most commonly witnessed

Those burquas (which are not required under Islam and in fact are simply a middle eastern affectation which was systematically foisted upon the rest of the world's islamic converts) ... those burquas are a symbol of islam's intended conquest of the non-muslim world

Burquas are being used by muslims (and the zionists who dumped millions of muslims on the West) as a 'religious flag'. So it's the same as if Russia infiltrated the United States under cover of 'mass immigration' slash 'multiculturalism' ---- and forced its Russian migrant woment to wear red head-scarves in public, in the US. Every time you saw those Russian women in their red head-scarves in US streets ---- you'd be reminded, over and over again, that Russia was taking the US inch by relentless inch

So don't give me the rubbish-propaganda about 'next thing they'll be telling Western women to stop wearing jeans'. Because that's a transparently-clear attempt to frighten slow-witted folk

Number One: WE THE PEOPLE did NOT invite Muslims to overrun our land. No. That was perpetrated by a succession of zionist-controlled puppets who temporarily held the office of 'leader' of our individual nations

Number Two: If we HAVE to tolerate muslims in our lands, then WE -- and not muslims --- will set the ground-rules. Because these are OUR lands ... dig ?

Number Three: the burqua is offensive in the extreme -- on several different levels

Number Four: we will NOT tolerate the burqua to be used as a symbol of conquest or oppression in our lands

Number Five: if our zionist-controlled puppet 'leaders' expect we --- their employers -- to pay lip-service to their garbage about 'terrorists' and 'strict security measures necessary' ---- then those same leaders WILL eradicate the ugly, incongrous, inappropriate, primitive and HIGH SECURITY RISK BURQUAS from our lives. Or they will LOSE their damned jobs

Number Six: Muslims BEG, BORROW, STEAL and STOW AWAY in order to sneak into the West. One of the stipulations of their acceptance is that they contract to CONFORM with our Western ways and QUIT attempting to 'stand out' and offend our Western sensibilities, i.e., ' when in Rome .... '. Which is EXACTLY what muslims expect of Western PAYING TOURISTS !

Number Seven: Those muslims who do not like this --- need not apply to the West

Those muslims who are unprepared to adhere by OUR demands --- do not apply

I hear a bunch of hate. Hate, prejudice and bigotry. I hate. I hate that were far from becoming one. All who talk about ur
right to freedoms but are so quick to deny others of theirs.
Ppl should have private liberties free from outside interference. They should be able to express their personal taste without being hindered by anyone else. We should all be free to exercise those freedoms, like, speech, expression, association, etc. How can 1 reach their fullest potential if their personal freedoms are limited?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To manipulate men, to propel them towards goals which you- the social reformer- see, but they may not, is to deny their human essence, to treat them as objects without wills of their own, and therefore to degrade them.
I.B.-1959
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Do any of u who think this ban is a good thing believe in the NWO? Your freedoms are next.

I believe that whoever thinks banning the way someone looks or dress is a good thing, needs to go to an educational reformity school that focuses on individuality and the process of being human. We have different opinions, everyone does. You think banning veils would be good right? Well what comes next, holloween masks? Fake hair tie ups? Ripped jeans? Laws restricting the rights of a human being are in no way shape or form a good thing. And I highly disagree with your argument. She's muslim. It's her faith and her culture, then she should be able to support her faith and her culture anywhere she travels in the world. And nobody should be able to stop her. Isn't that what freedom is all about anyways?

- Augusta

reply to post by Dock9


You are incorrect. Burqas were only required in Afghanistan. Even Iran does not enforce the burqa. Women are only required to cover their bodies and hair. The burqa is completely a choice (though granted, some men do force their wives to wear it).

Listen : when I see punks or other special dressed individus, guys or girls with lots of tattoos or piercings all over, what do you think is their specific reason for being like that ? they want to be an individual, a very special one, one you can remember and recognize all the way down even four weeks after you saw them !! it’s all about being unique, a real individual person, one out of the mass ok ?
So when I see women dressed in burqas, what is their individual characteristic ? they are all the same, nothing personnal, nothing human, just totaly black ( yeah why black or dark colours, why not yellow or red or green ???? good question also ... ) robots all the same .....
Just what would you say living in a town with on one side all those burqas and on the other side all KKK people with their outfit on ???? come on, is that a human society ?? everybody hiding for everybody, nothing personnal, nothing human ? no contact ? welcome in asylum, all authistic behaviour.
We live in a OPEN society, internet, facebook, contact all over the world, please let us not go back to the dark ages, we do not live in a prison, we live in open air together and we like to see people with smiles on their faces !!! Poor evolution is going on, we have to stop it, the beard man are coming ( lol ) trying to turn our society into a islamitic republic where girls/women are the first victims, then comes sharia, then comes murder for the honour etc etc ... hey people wake up, burqa here in Europ is the gate to hell ( one burqa doesn’t matter, but there are more and more, that is the real problem !! it is “ political “ calculation and infiltration trying by little steps to change OUR society here ).

Originally posted by Demetre
I hear a bunch of hate. Hate, prejudice and bigotry. I hate. I hate that were far from becoming one. All who talk about ur
right to freedoms but are so quick to deny others of theirs.
Ppl should have private liberties free from outside interference. They should be able to express their personal taste without being hindered by anyone else.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To manipulate men, to propel them towards goals which you- the social reformer- see, but they may not, is to deny their human essence, to treat them as objects without wills of their own, and therefore to degrade them.

personnal taste ?? are you kidding ? what is their personnal touch with burqa ?? they are all the same, robots like KKK with their outfit !! can you recognize them out of ten of them ? no !! so what do you speak about " personnal " ?? there is nothing personnal or human in this dressing ! black ghosts are they, we do not want that in OUR streets ok ? specially not in Europ where we got the French Revolution which means we are all brothers and sisters together, do brothers and sisters hide for each other ??? Freedom means OPEN society, not a closed one with dark black structures !!!

reply to post by Sunlionspirit


And when all those punks dress the same, have the same piercings, the same tattoos? How is that being an individual?

reply to post by Demetre


Right on Demetre!

They're chipping away at Our freedoms and getting away with it....dont be surprised...

Actually, by a lot of the responses in this thread it's clear to see we're chipping away at our own freedoms. We'll have no one to blame but ourselves.

reply to post by Wayne60



Yes but was the woman in the bank or in a places that demanded high facial visibility. I have seen lots of fashion fuax pas and have not yet physically assaulted anyone. this is racist thuggery. Would she have done this to someone wearing a kilt and sporran?

Has anywone sean Jean-Paul Gaultier's clothing.

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by Dock9

 

You are incorrect. Burqas were only required in Afghanistan. Even Iran does not enforce the burqa. Women are only required to cover their bodies and hair. The burqa is completely a choice (though granted, some men do force their wives to wear it).

True so to me the Burqa is a symbol of cultural resistance as well as being a fashion statement for a certain sector of society.

Originally posted by Dock9
Number Three: the burqua is offensive in the extreme -- on several different levels

This is the excuse MANY people use to squash the First Amendment for other people. It's the epitome of political correctness.

"It offends me, so people shouldn't be able to do it."

And I'll bet you're one who fights for the right to display gaudy and offensive Christmas paraphernalia because it's YOUR right... And complain about the Muslims being offended by it... Oh, Look:

Originally posted by Dock9
Christians have been forced to remove Christmas trees, to cancel Christmas plays in schools, etc. and there's a move to cancel the traditional 'Happy Christmas' greetings in cards and on shop-fronts and adopt instead 'Happy Holidays' and the like

However, at the same time Brits are being forced to dismantle their own culture in their own land because it might offend Muslims --

So, you don't give a crap if THEY are offended, but when YOU'RE offended, it's a different story. That's called a double standard and hypocrisy. Snuggle up to it.

:shk:

I think some people use the Constitution for toilet paper.