It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Italy Bans the Burka In Public

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 02:16 PM

Originally posted by Dr Expired Is the Burkah reallly a threat , or is it a legitimate style of dress?

With facial recognition software that can link your photo to your SSN of course they wouldn't want people to be anonymous. They want to watch every move you make.

If burkas are banned what about hats, wigs, Guy Fawkes masks?

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 02:21 PM
reply to post by VforVendettea

thats what im saying, if we let them take the RELIGIOUS and CULTURAL object that is the burqa, why wouldnt they take the guy maskes, wigs, or tops hats, i bet they will come for them once all the face recognition software comes in. GJ italy for leading the way into ignorance and war.

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 02:38 PM

Originally posted by Lynda101
Good on Italy. The burka denies a woman her identity and individuality and that is a huge price to pay for a religious belief. I wonder if women were ever allowed to privately vote on this garb how they would actually vote for their freedom from it. Certainly there would be those who love it, can't be bothered or can't face change, but I suspect there is also a number in there who would burn it merrily. It poses the question, if you can't do without your burka why come over to a non Islamic country to live, where you know you are deliberately going to be controversial? Ha Ha because you are a tolerant country doesn't wash easily when the burka and the alternative sharia law is lumped into a condition of our being 'honoured' by people leaping into western countries.

The burka is a statement of women's subjugaton and to trot it out in countries where women have fought very hard for their rights is for some an insult and a means of dragging women backwards. Its also a hideous and ugly piece of clothing designed to make a woman less feminine, lumpy and ugly. The argument put forward based on modesty falls short because sheer uglyness does not create a modestly dressed individual. (one needs to bear in mind that this modesty idea comes from the area of the world that gave us the wondrous belly dancing). As pointed out earlier this has nothing to do with Mohammed it seems more to come from a woman hater than a truly religious individual. I can understand its merits in the desert where protection from the sun and sand's needed, but not on the streets of Europe. Its also works as an isolationist thing and aids keeping select little groups together who don't want to integrate. I don't see the religious aspect of a burka because throughout the world many women will cover their heads with hats or scarves when entering a synagog,mosque or church etc.

An earlier poster mentioned the idea that it hides teenage angst and the upset some poor Muslim father would naturaly feel if his daughter were to grow up/defy him. Fathers all over the world go through that stage but many are pleased their daughters have the confidence to question and know their own minds. As women well past teenage wear the burka teenage angst doesn't really qualify it for me. Its often forgotten that because of its camouflage attributes it acts as a perfect means for men to don it and escape from crimes and more seriously it has the capability of hiding weapons under it. Its actually when used that way a security risk. Another point is that its an excellent means of hiding shoplifting.

I wonder how I would feel if I were stuck in the same outer clothing for the whole of my adult life, it just wouldn't happen. I don't avidly follow fashion but there is a dullness about the same black garb which seems stifling.

Something I have noticed on the tv coverage is that more and more women in countries like Egpt are stopping wearing even the scarf in public. My own Iranian friends here in the UK don't wear Islamic dress or scarves, in fact she teaches exercise and looks fabulous. A burka would stop her life and earnings were any of that tosh to be introduced here.

It must be quite dehumanizing to wear such a thing
and it must be quite uncomfortable.
You dont see too many non muslims wearing it do you?
Must be a reason for that.
People want to be free.
The Burqa does not represent freedom.
Islam does not represent Freedom.
Islam is the religion of slavery.
Women are slaves in Islam.

People are intimidated or brainwashed
into accepting their slavery.
Religion is slavery,physical as with a burqa or
mental as with beliefs.
edit on 3-8-2011 by RRokkyy because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 02:40 PM
reply to post by RRokkyy

Yes islam is the religion of slavery when they were the first in the WORLD to abolish it. stop it. just stop.

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 02:52 PM
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes

I agree. Banning something out of fear or ignorance is never a good idea, it reminds me of people's stance on gay marriage, based on nothing but fear and or ignorance.

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 02:55 PM
reply to post by Amassuo

oh yes women who are so humble and faithful to god that who by choice (i can proove this, not only in western countries) wear their hijabs daily are being punished. for what?

Do you even have a clue how hot it is here in Italy?

So your quote above begs a question... Are these women being 'punished' by their God, wearing these 'hijabs' and being 'freed' now with this ban? Or am I not understanding your message?


posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:00 PM
reply to post by silo13

it only gets hotter in the arab countries compared to italy. god isnt punishing them, the italian government is. women all over arab countries (arab women) and a lot of them dont even wear hijabs, there are christian arabs in every arab country, none of their women use the hijab, westerners who go to arab countries are not forced to cover their face, their hair, or any of that. So are those that still keep it on being enslaved? or do they do it of their own will.

and not just you everyone this thread defending the removal of the rights of the people for their security

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:03 PM

Originally posted by Amassuo
reply to post by RRokkyy

Yes islam is the religion of slavery when they were the first in the WORLD to abolish it. stop it. just stop.

All religions are a form of slavery, Islam is the worst currently.
Everyday attacks all around the world from the religion of peace.

photo of church burning

The almost inevitable result of new church building in Muslim-majority countries

African Jihad Gathers Pace: Muslims Burn Down Zanzibar Church
August 2nd, 2011 | Author: Un:dhimmi
Another Zanzibar church burning – another pre-Bombadan gesture of Interfaith Dialogue™ to the tiny Christian population of this Tanzanian island outpost:

Muslim extremists on Saturday (July 30) burned down a church building on Zanzibar island off the coast of Tanzania, church leaders said, just three days after another congregation’s facility on the island was reduced to ashes.

In Fuoni on the south coast of Zanzibar (known locally as Unguja), Islamic extremists torched the building of the Evangelical Assemblies of God-Tanzania (EAGT) at around 2 p.m., said Pastor Leonard Massasa, who oversees Zanzibar’s EAGT churches. The assailants were shouting, “Away with the church – we do not want infidels to spoil our community, especially our children,” Pastor Massasa said. Read More

Unmasking dhimmitude – the significance of Islam for Christians and Israel today
Andrew Tucker Saturday 2 January 2010 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share by email Printer friendly

The revival of Islam throughout the world presents the Church today with an enormous challenge, a challenge which so far it has failed to either understand or respond to in a satisfactory way. In his new book The Third choice – Islam, dhimmitude and freedom, Australian theologian, author, activist and Anglican priest Dr. Mark Durie argues that this challenge is deeply related to the concept of dhimmmitude, a notion that lies at the heart of the Islam.

In countries or regions ruled by Islamic governments, non-Muslims basically have three choices. First, they can accept Islam and become Muslims. If they refuse to do so, they should either be killed, or (the ”third choice”) they can choose to become dhimmis. There is no other way. Dhimmis are those who voluntarily accept the position of dhimmitude, an Islamic institution offered to non-Muslims under jihad conditions. In essence, dhimmis are second-class citizens in an Islamic society.

In her preface, Bat Ye’or (author of many books including Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis (2005), Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide (2001)), introduces this important book as follows:

“Durie exposes in clear language the multi-dimensional aspects of dhimmitude, a concept that pertains to a fourteen-centuries old civilization, birthed through jihad, and structured in accordance with the strict requirements of the Sharia….

Too few Westerners grasp that the concept of dhimmitude is crucial to understanding the relationship between Islam and non-Islam. As Durie argues, through a conspiracy of silence, the heads of state, church and community leaders, universities and media smother its reality under a blanket of ignorance. With numerous examples, the author denounces this intimidated concealment, which, he affirms, is undermining Western Judeo-Christian civilization and is contrary to human freedom and dignity….

[T]his specific type of evil is not something of the past, something that its promoters have renounced or agreed to relinquish; rather, this violation of human psychological and physical rights continues to develop freely in local and international politics, whether by violent jihadist threats and terrorism, or through entrenched and chronic religious discrimination.”

The best part of the book is devoted to a thorough review of the history of Islam over the past 14 centuries, an assessment of the current revival of Islam worldwide, and a textual analysis of Islamic literature. Durie analyses the life of Muhammad, and traces the historical development of Islam to the present day. He provides a detailed but clear overview of the basic literary sources of Islam, and how they are understood and interpreted within the different Islamic streams of thought. As such, it is a valuable tool for all Christians seeking to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon of Islam.

Dr. Mark Durie is well placed to do so. He is a theologian, human rights activist and pastor of an Anglican church. He has published many articles and books on the language and culture of the Acehnese, Christian-Muslim relations and religious freedom. A graduate of the Australian National University and the Australian College of Theology, he has held visiting appointments at the University of Leiden, MIT, UCLA and Stanford, and was elected a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities in 1992.

While based on extensive research, and containing many detailed notes and references, the book is intended for the average reader and is written in an accessible style. For the lay reader there is a useful Glossary of Arabic Terms, and for those interested in further research the author has compiled an extensive Bibiography. The book contains a detailed index.

Durie demonstrates that at the heart of Islam is the notion of rejection: rejection of all those who do not submit to the demands of Muhammad. Rejection was a key factor in Muhammad’s own personal development, and as a result has characterized Islam ever since. It lies at the heart of Islamic culture today. It has resulted in Muslims themselves adopting an attitude of “victimhood”, which, amongst other things, influences the conduct of Islamic government leaders in international relations. It has also led to the systematic oppression of non-Muslims over the centuries, and especially Jews and Christians. It is this attitude of rejection, asserts Durie, that all people, and in particular the Church, must understand and oppose:

”People of many faiths and none need to find freedom from the age-old legacy of the dhimma, and Moslims too, for dhimmitude degrades oppressors and oppressed alike. This book is therefore dedicated to the healing and freedom of all those who have fallen within the reach of dhimmitude, whatever their religious convictions, non-Muslim and Muslim alike.”

Dhimmi church leaders
Durie argues, in effect, that our understanding of, and response to, Islam tells us a lot about our understanding of our own identity as Christians. He recounts many alarming stories in the book that to my mind sum up the appalling failure (refusal?) of Church leaders to date to either understand Islam or respond in a meaningful way. They have unwittingly adopted a dhimmi attitude towards Islam, and in so doing betray a deep misunderstanding of their own identity as Christians and the calling of the Church in this world. For example:

• “In March 2003, Archbishop Frank Griswold, leader of the American Episcopalian church, was interviewed for an Islamic website He stated that the US should not be a superpower but a “super-servant”. This well-meaning but naïve statement was consequently reproduced on a number of American Muslim websites, and applauded as a victory of Islam over Christianity.”
• “In 2007 a letter entitled A Common Word between Us and You was addressed by 138 Muslim scholars to the Christian world. A group of Yale theologians responded by placing a full-page advertisement in The New York Times, which was endorsed by 300 Christian leaders including Yonggi Cho, Bill Hybels, Robert Schuller, Rick Warren and John Stott. “Consistent with the worldview of dhimmitude, the Yale theologians adopted a tone of grateful self-humiliation and self-inculpation, using expressions such as:

‘it is with humility and hope that we receive your generous letter’;
the Muslims’ letter was ‘extraordinary’ and written in ‘generosity’;
‘we ask forgiveness of the All-Merciful One and of the Muslim community around the world’.

No comparable expressions of humble gratitude or expression of guilt were offered from the Muslim side. No doubt the Christians believed they were relating from a position of strength, by invoking Christian virtues of humility and self-examination. However they appear not to have taken account of the dynamics of dhimmitude and the possibility that these statements could be understood by Muslims as a display of self-acknowledged inferiority.

Ironically, while this dialogue was being conducted on the pages of the New York Times, the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic thought, which had initiated and hosted the Common Word process on the Muslim side, was broadcasting fatwas on its website by its Chief Scholar which condemned converts from Islam to Christianity as apostates, characterizing them as deserving of death or else they should be stripped of all legal rights and treated legally as non-persons (because they ought to be dead).”

Dhimmitude, the Jews and Israel
This book is also important in that it exposes how Islam is so fundamentally rooted in its rejection of the Jewish people, and that this attitude still informs the approach of Muslims today towards Israel and the Jewish people. Although in some times and places their treatment was more humane than in others, Jews and Christians have always been treated as dhimmis. It is this same basic philosophy that underlies the attitude of the Muslim world towards the State of Israel, and why so many Muslims ultimately cannot accept the notion of a Jewish State.

One begins to understand why Yasser Arafat in 2000 at Camp David was unable to accept the offer by Prime Minister Barak for over 95% of the West Bank. Had he done so he would have faced certain death at the hands of his own Muslim supporters.

Durie challenges the claim of historian Bernard Lewis that Islamic hostility towards Jews is a cultural and not a theological issue. Durie: “Islamic hostility to the Jews is theological to its bootstraps…. Lewis’s astounding claim … has been relied on by many Western intellectuals, corrupting their understanding of Islamic history.”

Durie’s book is a powerful warning to both Christian and secular leaders to confront the reality of Islam, and not to adopt a dhimmi attitude of submission. This requires holding onto the truth while acting in love.

”Love for the other and truth are two attributes to be held together, the one complementing the other. Truth without love can be harsh and even cruel, but love without truth can be equally dangerous, as, lacking discernment, it steers the soul into shipwreck after shipwreck. Neither of these alternatives is acceptable.”

The Third Choice – Islam, dhimmitude and freedom is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand Islam and what it means for the Church and Israel today
edit on 3-8-2011 by RRokkyy because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:13 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:16 PM
As others have said, a complete ban is not the answer, but inside of places where you need to be monitored (government buildings, stores, ect.) they should have to keep it off. Do you see many people with sunglasses inside of stores, or motorcycle helmets? No, because that could compromise security. The same thing happens to be here.

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:16 PM
reply to post by RRokkyy


KEY WORD. and you defend israel? your hilarious

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:18 PM
reply to post by Raelsatu

Someones choice of of dress that covers their face in public is illegal in the West.

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:19 PM
reply to post by ATSforRacialHatred

dont be so quick to jump the gun, atleast they arent islamophobic themselves. And its a good thing to see the ignorant, disgusting, hateful, evil, people who defend israel. It is nice to see deceptive satanists at work, so all in all, even if you may have a slight point, i dont think your over-reaction will bring anything good to anyone. ATS staff DO try to keep it all balanced, so come one, dont jump the gun. if we can talk it out logically then why not do that

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:22 PM
Good for them.

I'm in total agreement.

I wouldn't want it on my reservation. There are plenty of Islamic Nations they could choose to live in... let them go there and integrate. They don't want to integrate in Europe. I have no sympathy.

There's another story running of a bangladeshi man who refuses to learn English. He doesn't want to integrate yet he's happy to receive all the benefits his surrogate society gives him and his family. Deport him. Get rid of them all. They are a burden on all hard working honest people who contribute & form a healthy society.

We are in a period of great change, so let's address some pertinent immigration and aid policies. Tough choices no doubt, but enough is enough, they've all had generations now to make an effort, if they can't be bothered or simply refuse, cart them off. Easy Jet or Ryan Air could drop them off in Somalia or Ethiopia. Job done.

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:22 PM
...and here come the Islamophobes...

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:25 PM
how many of you talkged to a hijabi about her scarf? i suggest you go do it before posting your ignorant nonsense here.

and yes the burqas WILL bring sharia law to europe eh? genius, absolute genius the one that said that

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:27 PM
First of all the Burkha is a garment like any other face covering attire. As such it is a security risk. We do not allow the covering of the face in all sorts of places and quite rightly. no hoodies, no bikers with helmets etc.

Second, here in the UK, a criminal tried to flee the country disguised in a Burkha, he was male! DUH!!!!

But most important of all : western social intercourse is based on facial recognition, we even invented smilies for emails to compensate!!!!!!!!!!! Facial changes are part of a conversation. We use them to assess the person we are talking to, most often quite unconciously.

The Burkha is defended in the west by non Muslims who are misguided politically correct people who need to wake up. I hate the BNP and equivelent organisations but our bowing to the islamation of our country is handing these vile extremists so much ammunition it beggers belief.

I know some moderate muslims who can't understand how the Burkha is worn far more widely here in the UK than in Pakistan!

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:39 PM
reply to post by malcr

dam moslems coming in here bring their burqas and using them to brainwash moslem-lovers

pay no attention to the dual citizen ship israelis running off with our money, thats not a security risk at all
edit on 3-8-2011 by Amassuo because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:39 PM
reply to post by Amassuo

Go talk to them...Yeah right...You go talk to those women in the FLDS....and they will defend the right of there husband to have sex with a 14 year old because they had a some kind of religious union. So it's okay...I don't think so. If they are brainwashed talking to them doesn't work for me.

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 03:40 PM
reply to post by relocator

OOOH burqas and pedofilia are the same thing now eh

nice arguements

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in