French ban on Islamic face veil comes into force, page 44
privacy
reply posted on 20-4-2011 @ 06:21 PM by Aloysius the Gaul
Originally posted by Saracen1
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
I don`t dispute that. I`m merely pointing out, to the anti immigration fanatics among you, the historical debt that is owed to former colonial peoples.
You weren't pointing it out - you were highlighting it as if it were the only factor that defeated Germany in 2 world wars!!
That their presence in Europe today can be traced back to the destruction of Europe during two world wars and the reconstruction period thereafter.
Not really - most immigration dates to the 60's and 70's - especially from Alegeria at het end of hte war there.
Whatever the case may be, Muslims in France, 2nd 3rd and 4th generations are as French as anybody else.
Apaprently they disagree with you.
reply posted on 20-4-2011 @ 09:43 PM by poet1b
reply to post by Saracen1
Wrong again!
You need to look up the history, and while you are at it, look up who ended slavery.
If it was up to the Muslims, slavery would be a thriving business to this day.
Banning the veil is just the next step in liberating the people of the world from abusive and backwards religions and cultures.
The burqa is just the beginning. The hijab is next. Then we will get them banned in international airports.
Wrong again!
You need to look up the history, and while you are at it, look up who ended slavery.
If it was up to the Muslims, slavery would be a thriving business to this day.
Banning the veil is just the next step in liberating the people of the world from abusive and backwards religions and cultures.
The burqa is just the beginning. The hijab is next. Then we will get them banned in international airports.
reply posted on 20-4-2011 @ 10:50 PM by coquine
reply to post by Saracen1
That is just plain false. There were some arabs that took part in the war, and their impact was nothing near as effective in saving France as that of the allies.
They were also the first generation, that recieve respect, because they made an effort to integrate and be part of the country- today, the old ones are not part of the movement of violence happening today.
The young ones reject the notion that they are french and claim the french are their enemies.
These enemies provide them with free housing, welfare, and all kinds of perks to allow them to keep up their culture. Look at any of the very nice apartments buildings provided them- the building is covered in satelite dishes at each balcony- they get those free so they can watch TV from home in arabic.
In Paris, despite it beign against the law, they are allowed to take over entire streets, block them off, have their own security forces to keep non-muslims out, while they pray in the street. That means if you are french and LIVE on that street, you cannot leave your apartment, nor get to it, during those hours.
The older generation is less extreme muslims, and don't have women covered in burkas anyway. It is the new arrivals and that second generation that have had a rise in fundamentalism.
When this law was being created, it was brought up within the context of finding some way the arabs would have to make an effort to recieve their welfare- that a woman would have to show her face when at the welfare office or picking up her check. Afterall, without seeing the face, how would you know if you have given three checks to the same woman??
If anything, I would say this law is too passive, it is a lame attempt after having made too much effort to welcome them and make them comfortable and being walked on. The people would rather not have to call on other countries to save them, as what happened in the past when efforts to be fair and friendly with the Germans allowed them to be taken over, they are trying to avoid that eventuality.
Though this other poster called me an Islamaphobe, I have friends who are Muslim, and they also see reason for this law (not that we have much hope it will be effectively put into usage).
On another board, I am also in a debate in which there are claims no woman willingly wants to wear a burqa, I know that many do, and I respect and understand that (hey, we hide behind make up don't we? We wear high heeled shoes that limit our movement, and many are into confining dress like corsets....) but that is not the question with this law. It is an attempt to ask the extremists to make a little effort at integration, since they are given all the freedoms (and more- if the french tried to take over and block streets without getting any permit, they would be ousted! They don't get free satelite either)
That is just plain false. There were some arabs that took part in the war, and their impact was nothing near as effective in saving France as that of the allies.
They were also the first generation, that recieve respect, because they made an effort to integrate and be part of the country- today, the old ones are not part of the movement of violence happening today.
The young ones reject the notion that they are french and claim the french are their enemies.
These enemies provide them with free housing, welfare, and all kinds of perks to allow them to keep up their culture. Look at any of the very nice apartments buildings provided them- the building is covered in satelite dishes at each balcony- they get those free so they can watch TV from home in arabic.
In Paris, despite it beign against the law, they are allowed to take over entire streets, block them off, have their own security forces to keep non-muslims out, while they pray in the street. That means if you are french and LIVE on that street, you cannot leave your apartment, nor get to it, during those hours.
The older generation is less extreme muslims, and don't have women covered in burkas anyway. It is the new arrivals and that second generation that have had a rise in fundamentalism.
When this law was being created, it was brought up within the context of finding some way the arabs would have to make an effort to recieve their welfare- that a woman would have to show her face when at the welfare office or picking up her check. Afterall, without seeing the face, how would you know if you have given three checks to the same woman??
If anything, I would say this law is too passive, it is a lame attempt after having made too much effort to welcome them and make them comfortable and being walked on. The people would rather not have to call on other countries to save them, as what happened in the past when efforts to be fair and friendly with the Germans allowed them to be taken over, they are trying to avoid that eventuality.
Though this other poster called me an Islamaphobe, I have friends who are Muslim, and they also see reason for this law (not that we have much hope it will be effectively put into usage).
On another board, I am also in a debate in which there are claims no woman willingly wants to wear a burqa, I know that many do, and I respect and understand that (hey, we hide behind make up don't we? We wear high heeled shoes that limit our movement, and many are into confining dress like corsets....) but that is not the question with this law. It is an attempt to ask the extremists to make a little effort at integration, since they are given all the freedoms (and more- if the french tried to take over and block streets without getting any permit, they would be ousted! They don't get free satelite either
)reply posted on 21-4-2011 @ 03:00 AM by eyesdown
reply to post by coquine
Her whole blog is really enlightening, the biggest problem that some Muslim women is face is that all the laws reguarding them are made by men. They face nothing but backlash in Saudi Arabia everytime they want to do something it is a man deciding why they cant do it.
I do feel the veil is a womens issue and as such needs more of a female voice in the media to discuss it.
Her whole blog is really enlightening, the biggest problem that some Muslim women is face is that all the laws reguarding them are made by men. They face nothing but backlash in Saudi Arabia everytime they want to do something it is a man deciding why they cant do it.
I do feel the veil is a womens issue and as such needs more of a female voice in the media to discuss it.
edit on 21-4-2011 by eyesdown
because: to be clearer
edit on 21-4-2011 by eyesdown because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 21-4-2011 @ 03:20 AM by Nammu
reply to post by poet1b
*sigh* Ok i'll bite. Although this does detract from the debate at hand and you can just read your previous replies to see how it went.
You said:
So you imply that my viewpoint and reasoning, because i know personally that there are women who do want to wear burkas, is in line with brutes that beat their women.
To which i replied:
and you replied
Which again is an ad hominen attack relating my viewpoint to someone who believes women should get beaten up, so you have insinuated that I am a women that thinks its ok to hit women if they are 'disobediant'.
You read these articles from strong sane women and discount it as propoganda and dishonest. You refuse to believe or understand the other side. You refuse to listen and understand the views of women who are actually in that situation. It's easy to discount anything against your argument as 'propoganda', that's a cop out.
If you would care to point out what in the sources is 'dishonest'? And also the xenophobic and racist parts too?
If you re-read the Why Must I Cast Off The Veil? article you would actually see that the writer actually agrees with your viewpoint and uses a lot of the same reasoning I have seen you and others use in this debate as to why the Burka is bad. So be careful about the propoganda, xenophobic and racist claims.
That article hits the nail on the head for me.
*sigh* Ok i'll bite. Although this does detract from the debate at hand and you can just read your previous replies to see how it went.
You said:
All the brutes who like to beat their women say the same thing. She wants it. See how she keeps coming back for more. The nasty little biotch knows she deserves it, I am doing her a favor. The whole, they want to wear burqa's argument is the same sort of thing all brutes claim.
So you imply that my viewpoint and reasoning, because i know personally that there are women who do want to wear burkas, is in line with brutes that beat their women.
To which i replied:
Wait a minute, i'm a woman and your reply seems to claim that i'm an advocate for beating woman?
and you replied
You can be a woman and be an advocate for women who don't behave getting beaten for disobedience.
Which again is an ad hominen attack relating my viewpoint to someone who believes women should get beaten up, so you have insinuated that I am a women that thinks its ok to hit women if they are 'disobediant'.
Your three links read like propaganda pieces, with the same racist and xenophobic statements, the ole, why are you afraid of women in burqa's nonsense.
You read these articles from strong sane women and discount it as propoganda and dishonest. You refuse to believe or understand the other side. You refuse to listen and understand the views of women who are actually in that situation. It's easy to discount anything against your argument as 'propoganda', that's a cop out.
If you would care to point out what in the sources is 'dishonest'? And also the xenophobic and racist parts too?
If you re-read the Why Must I Cast Off The Veil? article you would actually see that the writer actually agrees with your viewpoint and uses a lot of the same reasoning I have seen you and others use in this debate as to why the Burka is bad. So be careful about the propoganda, xenophobic and racist claims.
That article hits the nail on the head for me.
edit on 21-4-2011 by Nammu because: fixing quotes
reply posted on 21-4-2011 @ 12:24 PM by poet1b
reply to post by Nammu
Actually this debate goes to the heart of the matter.
You forgot to include your final comment.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
No where in my comments do I accuse you of being an "advocate" for "a man placing his hands in anger". I only point out that some women can and do advocate men beating women for disobeying.
You don't knowingly or willingly plead for men to beat their women in anger, but you do accept it as a way of life. The clue is in the statement, " placing his hands in anger on a woman", which says that as long as it is not in anger, then it is acceptable. There is a big difference between willingly encouraging men to beat women, and passively allowing it to happen by turning a blind eye to what is going on, and the latter is what I am accusing you of doing.
You do advocate women wearing the burqa, even though it has been shown, and even admitted by those on your side of the argument, that most women see the burqa as a tool and a symbol of oppression, and abuse. This clearly demonstrates you willingness to turn a blind eye to abuse and oppression.
Most likely you hold this opinion, because the only form of love you know is abusive and oppressive. This also explains the reason why the basis for your opinion is so weak, and so one dimensional, and why you deny the vast number or reasons why the burqa should not be allowed.
Actually this debate goes to the heart of the matter.
You forgot to include your final comment.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
So are you accusing me of being an advocate for beating women who 'don't behave' because of my viewpoint? Man, this is just getting silly. Ad hominen indeed. I don't advocate a man placing his hands in anger on a woman for ANY reason, and vice versa.
No where in my comments do I accuse you of being an "advocate" for "a man placing his hands in anger". I only point out that some women can and do advocate men beating women for disobeying.
You don't knowingly or willingly plead for men to beat their women in anger, but you do accept it as a way of life. The clue is in the statement, " placing his hands in anger on a woman", which says that as long as it is not in anger, then it is acceptable. There is a big difference between willingly encouraging men to beat women, and passively allowing it to happen by turning a blind eye to what is going on, and the latter is what I am accusing you of doing.
You do advocate women wearing the burqa, even though it has been shown, and even admitted by those on your side of the argument, that most women see the burqa as a tool and a symbol of oppression, and abuse. This clearly demonstrates you willingness to turn a blind eye to abuse and oppression.
Most likely you hold this opinion, because the only form of love you know is abusive and oppressive. This also explains the reason why the basis for your opinion is so weak, and so one dimensional, and why you deny the vast number or reasons why the burqa should not be allowed.
edit on 21-4-2011 by poet1b because: clearify that I point out only that some women can be advocates of punishment for disobedience.
reply posted on 22-4-2011 @ 11:40 AM by bluemirage5
Here is one of many reasons why the burqua should be banned.....
this happened in AUSTRALIA:
aca.ninemsn.com.au...
and this happens alot more often than any of you realise!!!!!!
this happened in AUSTRALIA:
aca.ninemsn.com.au...
and this happens alot more often than any of you realise!!!!!!
reply posted on 22-4-2011 @ 01:36 PM by poet1b
reply to post by bluemirage5
Wow, you can hear the panic in her voice. Notice her husband is not wearing the same type of traditional body covering clothing. He has this hard attitude as he shuffles her off. That guy looks like a wife beater. He probably will take her home and slap her around.
They should take her and he children into protective custody. Chances are they will find a great deal of evidence of abuse.
Wow, you can hear the panic in her voice. Notice her husband is not wearing the same type of traditional body covering clothing. He has this hard attitude as he shuffles her off. That guy looks like a wife beater. He probably will take her home and slap her around.
They should take her and he children into protective custody. Chances are they will find a great deal of evidence of abuse.
reply posted on 23-4-2011 @ 10:09 AM by civilchallenger
Originally posted by coquine
reply to post by Saracen1
In Paris, despite it beign against the law, they are allowed to take over entire streets, block them off, have their own security forces to keep non-muslims out, while they pray in the street. That means if you are french and LIVE on that street, you cannot leave your apartment, nor get to it, during those hours.
And the solution to this problem is what... more injustice by forcing people to take off clothing YOU deem offensive? Well, no, the solution to the problem is arresting the person responsible for blocking traffic to a street. The solution to a crime is to stop the criminal. Get it?
Look, why don't you make this a lot easier by simply announcing you don't believe in the principles of liberty and you will control others in what ways you can... period. At that point you'll be honest with yourself and we can agree to disagree.
edit on 23-4-2011 by civilchallenger
because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 23-4-2011 @ 01:42 PM by poet1b
reply to post by civilchallenger
Yeah, because covering ones self from head to toe has been so effective in establishing liberty in Muslim controlled countries.
I don't see were it is implied that banning the burqa is the answer to ending street prayers.
Yeah, because covering ones self from head to toe has been so effective in establishing liberty in Muslim controlled countries.
I don't see were it is implied that banning the burqa is the answer to ending street prayers.
reply posted on 23-4-2011 @ 01:52 PM by poet1b
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Yeah, under the current cozy relationships with Islam, men wearing burqa is the ultimate solution.
I can't think of any better way for a heavily armed, armor wearing soldier, to get around, than by the burqa. Just a bunch or 6 foot plus girls out to go shopping, and then, blamedy blam blam blam.
It won't happen right away. At first the public will have to get used to men running around in burqas. Then after the pattern has been established, our liberties can be fully utilized.
The police are going to love this.
Yeah, under the current cozy relationships with Islam, men wearing burqa is the ultimate solution.
I can't think of any better way for a heavily armed, armor wearing soldier, to get around, than by the burqa. Just a bunch or 6 foot plus girls out to go shopping, and then, blamedy blam blam blam.
It won't happen right away. At first the public will have to get used to men running around in burqas. Then after the pattern has been established, our liberties can be fully utilized.
The police are going to love this.
reply posted on 26-4-2011 @ 06:39 AM by Nammu
reply to post by poet1b
Nope. Wrong. I dont' accept it in any way at all. None whatsover. No man should ever be violent towards a woman in any way and vice versa. I've experienced a family member go through a violent relationship so don't you even dare to suggest that i believe any form of domestic violence is ever acceptable for any reason.
I personally have never been abused or opressed so wrong again. You form your opinion of me is based on so many assumptions it is unreal. I could also assume that you are the type of man that likes to control women and believes that they are not capable of deciding for themselves or living their own lives, but i know you might not be, so i'll leave the ad hominen's out, do the right thing and assume you're probably a nice guy although we have a different viewpoint. Pity you cannot afford the same courtesy to someone with an opposing viewpoint.
Good debate though.
You don't knowingly or willingly plead for men to beat their women in anger, but you do accept it as a way of life.
Nope. Wrong. I dont' accept it in any way at all. None whatsover. No man should ever be violent towards a woman in any way and vice versa. I've experienced a family member go through a violent relationship so don't you even dare to suggest that i believe any form of domestic violence is ever acceptable for any reason.
I personally have never been abused or opressed so wrong again. You form your opinion of me is based on so many assumptions it is unreal. I could also assume that you are the type of man that likes to control women and believes that they are not capable of deciding for themselves or living their own lives, but i know you might not be, so i'll leave the ad hominen's out, do the right thing and assume you're probably a nice guy although we have a different viewpoint. Pity you cannot afford the same courtesy to someone with an opposing viewpoint.
Good debate though.
reply posted on 26-4-2011 @ 12:39 PM by poet1b
reply to post by Nammu
Glad to hear that you do not accept it at all. You might want to watch this video then.
www.youtube.com...
That's right, Islam does advocate beating women.
This whole claim that the burqa ban is a violation of women's rights is nothing but a huge propaganda bunch of nonsense put out by people who view women as inferior, and who use the burqa and the hijab as tools to control women.
Glad to hear that you do not accept it at all. You might want to watch this video then.
www.youtube.com...
That's right, Islam does advocate beating women.
This whole claim that the burqa ban is a violation of women's rights is nothing but a huge propaganda bunch of nonsense put out by people who view women as inferior, and who use the burqa and the hijab as tools to control women.
While we were Distracted with Gay Marriage news This happend today
Posted 18 days ago with 81 member flags
Posted 18 days ago with 81 member flags
Critical Mass Has Arrived: Fast & Furious Scandal - Dems Join With GOP
Posted 17 days ago with 32 member flags
Posted 17 days ago with 32 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
Houla, Syria Stunt Proves: Old Tricks are the Best Tricks- NATO Hypocracy!
Middle East Issues: 2 minutes ago
Middle East Issues: 2 minutes ago
Driving in the UK (or wherever) - an amplification of diminishing social attitudes?
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 18 minutes ago
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 18 minutes ago
This is how the right wing is going to turn states into third world countries one by one
Political Ideology: 22 minutes ago
Political Ideology: 22 minutes ago
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
"CIA are drug smugglers." - Federal Judge Bonner, head of DEA- You don't get better proof than th
General Conspiracies: 13 hours ago, 35 flags
General Conspiracies: 13 hours ago, 35 flags
Quantum Gravity Model "Loads" "Programs" from NON-PHYSICAL DIMENSION with INVERTED PENTAGRAMS!
Science & Technology: 12 hours ago, 31 flags
Science & Technology: 12 hours ago, 31 flags
Synchonicity of generations, had my mind blown away tonight by grandson.
The Gray Area: 14 hours ago, 15 flags
The Gray Area: 14 hours ago, 15 flags
Defense Department Seeks Legal Authority to Deploy Reservists onto American Streets
Breaking Alternative News: 16 hours ago, 14 flags
Breaking Alternative News: 16 hours ago, 14 flags
Was Jesus a Greek-Phoenician Philosopher? A hidden book, revealed…
Conspiracies in Religions: 7 hours ago, 14 flags
Conspiracies in Religions: 7 hours ago, 14 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
Bilderberg 2012 power masters to meet in the US (again - just like in 2008 !)
2012 US Elections: 15 hours ago, 46 replies
2012 US Elections: 15 hours ago, 46 replies
Defense Department Seeks Legal Authority to Deploy Reservists onto American Streets
Breaking Alternative News: 16 hours ago, 44 replies
Breaking Alternative News: 16 hours ago, 44 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.004 seconds
Page processed in: 0.384 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.004 seconds
Page processed in: 0.384 seconds
