French ban on Islamic face veil comes into force

reply to post by Saracen1


Except I provide legitimate links to back up what I have learned about history, while you never produce links to back up what you were taught, and what you probably teach to boys, which you probably learned from the Muslim brotherhood.

Thanks, you do a good job of proving my point.

reply to post by poet1b


Hey popeye, don`t you know the muslim brotherhood are our new best friends, along with al qaeda in the maghrib?
Those are the guys were fighting for in Libya in case you don`t know.

Don`t you find it ironic that most of the supporters of the French ban on the Islamic veil, support the aggression in Libya, which will in all likelyhood result in a taliban existence for the millions of liberated women of Libya.
That puts paid to the lie, that they`re supporters of muslim womens rights.

Originally posted by Saracen1
reply to post by poet1b

 

Hey popeye, everytime I think you`ve undone yourself, you go and surpass it, damn!

Only warriors and not civillians were killed during the first crusade eh?

After the fall of the Roman Empire, no city in the Eastern hemisphere had running water till London in the 19th century......lol.

You see thats what happens when you get your history from the Aryan Nation.

PS I wonder if those white supremacists realise that the real " Aryans", are in fact Iranians and we know what religion they follow.

The comments about us being Aryan supremasists are offencive, and quite honestly, very poor mannered of you.

What was the main intent of the Crusades? To stop the mindless killing of Christians on their pilgrimage to the Holy Land. Who was targeted? Warriors. Civilians died, and yes, there were people of poor repute fighting in the name of God.

Fast forward 1000 years, who is the target? Well, look where the stabbings, bombings, death threats and general mayhem are directed in the "Aryan Lands" Mainstreet markets don't usually have a high concentration of military now do they? Killing civilians as a direct target in the name of Allah it seems.

As for the comment about Aryans originating from Iran, state your proof (Not conducted in Iran please) and genetic research poving that white people are in fact desendant from Iranian bloodlines.

Side note, how many times have you seen broadcasts of white people holding Islamic heads telling Islamists to repent and honour Jehovah?

reply to post by poet1b

The Fourth Crusade (1202–1204) was originally intended to conquer Muslim-controlled Jerusalem by means of an invasion through Egypt. Instead, in April 1204, the Crusaders of Western Europe invaded and conquered the Christian (Eastern Orthodox) city of Constantinople, capital of the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire). This is seen as one of the final acts in the Great Schism between the Eastern Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church.

en.wikipedia.org...



Forth crusade it was not the first one .

Originally posted by poet1b


Sorry, but in this instance, Islam is the perfect tool for the job. The problem is that everywhere along the periphery of Muslim control is a war zone, and it has been this way for over a thousand years.

What fabulous generalization of anti-muslim hysteria. Thanks for proving my point. Europe, on the other hand, has been so incredibly peaceful for the past thousand plus years.


I maintain my point that this is yet another issue being latched onto by those who stand to gain from creating a perceived tension between the Christian and Muslim/West and East world. This agenda is furthered by those who want to make this into a referendum on 'multiculturalism"and why the arab world is incompatible with the western world, which is nonsense.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Saracen1

 

Except I provide legitimate links to back up what I have learned about history, while you never produce links to back up what you were taught, and what you probably teach to boys, which you probably learned from the Muslim brotherhood.
Thanks, you do a good job of proving my point.

emphass mine.

Yeah, no hyperbole there. All facts that disprove you anti-muslim perspective is manufactured by 'the muslim brotherhood'.

It's almost as if there are people here who absolutely MUST latch onto to these issues in a way that frame everything as 'east vs west', despite all intelligent people knowing that such broad generalizations, painted in stark black and white are never accurate.

Didn`t you say in an earlier post that you attended white supremacist camps, or was that popeye?
Either way, the general gist of your arguments lead me to conclude that your (and popeyes), sympathies lay in that direction.

I love the way you explain away all the pillaging,rapes and plunder of the crusades as medieval collateral damage

I don`t think i have to mention the number of civillian deaths in Iraq, Afghanistan/Pakistan here..oh i forgot they were collateral damage, you see they didn`t mean to kill all those people and spread urainium all over the place, they just got...... well kinda in the way as we laid waste to entire nations.

Have you seen any of the videos coming out of Iraq/abu graib afghan etc...with yanks posing beside the the bodies of the civillians they`d just murdered.

You see it`s easy to make accusations...but you really ought to look closer to home.

reply to post by Saracen1


Who are you replying to?

second

sorry

ironarm......I think.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


While Europe has fought its share of wars like all civilizations, Islam has been continuously at a war of aggression since the conception of the religion. Not only is Islam creating divisions and hostility in Europe, but also in Africa, India, Central Asia, China, and Indonesia.

No doubt you think all facts that show Muslim aggression are manufactured by the Aryan brotherhood, as Sarcean constantly claims.

It is not East verses West, it is the world verses Islamic extremists.

There are immigrants from all over the world in Europe, but the Muslims are the ones creating all the problems for everyone else.

At what point in time do you start to realize that Islam is the problem?

Originally posted by poet1b

 

There are immigrants from all over the world in Europe, but the Muslims are the ones creating all the problems for everyone else.

At what point in time do you start to realize that Islam is the problem?

Some people have traded their intelligence for political correctness. Like a nervous horse that wears blinkers, political correctness obscures a broader vision/understanding of the world around them. It's a means by which reality is filtered out and replaced by a false truth that allows them to sleep easily of a night time.

IRM

.
Anyway, I was on Reddit.com last night. Close to 2000 upvotes to the French for their proposed ban on the face veil, just by the way

And while I was browsing the web, I came across a thread title somewhere, which said ' Syria and Turkey Ban the Veil - Are THEY 'islamaphobic' and 'racist' too ? '

Accompanything this was a link to an article by one of the British newspapers I think, detailing how Turkey (vast majority of its population of course are muslims) had banned the veil because the Turkish government regarded the veil as ' intended as a political statement '

The article went on to say that Syria, too, was opposed to the veil for a variety of reasons

So the question is a good one: ARE predominantly muslim nations 'islamaphobic' and 'racist' for banning the veil ?

Puts it all in perspective, doesn't it ?

Illustrates how ONE SIDED are the claims of 'islamaphobia' and 'racism' when applied to the French and all those other Western governments and populations who object to overt demonstrations of islamic invasion, using the ostentatious full beard and tent like garb sported by muslim AFTER they get to the West

And particularly when it's known that the Saudis are PAYING migrant muslims to advertise their presence in the West by utilizing the muslim beards and tent like garments

After a bit more browsing, I learned that one week ago, Turkey had removed its ban on the veil because it had been put under pressure

So, more light is thrown on this ludicrous topic with each passing day

And for those unaware, the Saudis PAY liberal muslims to adopt the veil/burka and beard. They pay them 250 Pounds Sterling a month, which is a fortune in that economy. But these were liberal muslims who had not worn the beards or face veils and tent garb previously

reply to post by Dock9


Nice to see that the direction towards the lowest possible common denominator is so attractive, with France becoming more like Turkey and Syria!

But as to why a government bans something, and why people agree that's a good or bad idea are two different things.

Yes some of the people who support the ban are xenophobes and racists and they state it pretty clearly when explaining why they support it.

Some of them believe it's aiding women's rights and they state it when they are explaining why they support it.

Some of them believe it's a cultural insult and they state it when they are explaining it.

Turkey, what's left of the Ottoman Empire, which itself was not Islamic in it's idealogy, politically sees religious fundamentalists and zealots as a threat to a stable government.

The thinking is that those following the older traditions and customs are more likely to be fundamentalists and zealots.

So yes in a way that is Islamic Phobia, a phobia of zealots.

You can be a Muslim and be afraid of Muslim zealots, just like you can be a Jew and afraid of Jewish zealots, or a Christian and afraid of Christian Zealots.

All religions have their zealots and most nations that don't have communist systems have a predominant majority of one religion.

Just because that is the religion of the land doesn't mean they want to be ruled over by zealots from that religion.

However it's a bit of a stretch on Turkey's part that all people who wear the Burka are zealots or married to one, which is probably why they weakened their resolve on the issue.

As a non-muslim, westerner, I am afraid I must insist all belly dancers wear a veil or I am going to want my money back.

Sorry I am pretty firm on this.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler



What is inescapable throughout this and other threads critical of Wahhabism -- is that you're strongly motivated to continue your support. One might be tempted to suspect you represent vested interests

Now, something which you fail to address, apparently, is the fact the Saudis have invested (speaking of vested interests) over 100 BILLION dollars into (and this is how they describe it ) The Promotion of the Spread of Islam in the West '

The Saudis PAY liberal muslims to adopt the beard and burka, niquab, face veils. They PAY those liberal muslims handsomely - to the tune of approx. $500 per month. Within an economy where that amount far exceeds whatever monies they can earn

The Saudis have boasted --- as I'm SURE you're fully aware --- of getting Murdoch-Fox to withdraw from news reports about violence, any mention of the muslims involved. So, when Fox reported muslims were burning cars and smashing vehicles and raping women of the host population -- all it took was a phone call from a Saudi investor for Fox to remove all mention of muslims. The reports were then amended to simple cases of violence, rioting and rapings. The muslim element had been air-brushed out of the news

You've ALSO failed to address the truth insofar as Wabbabist nations WILL NOT TOLERATE non-muslims or non-muslim religions

this at the same time as the Saudis freely admit to spending BILLIONS of dollars constructing mosques and muslim schools etc. in the reluctant host nations' towns and villages

You haven't addressed the misogny rampant in Islam

You haven't addressed the fact that a muslim female (even young girls) are required to provide four muslim males who will act as witnesses to their rape. If the girl cannot produce those four muslim males (and has any girl managed to produce any, ever ? ) then the rape victim HERSELF is judged a liar, a defamer, a prostitute -- and she is sentenced to death and/or flogging, jailing, etc.

You have not explained WHY the Saudis -- rich on the money we stupidly pay for oil -- have undertaken to fund, to the tune of billions, what can only be described as an invasion of muslims in the West

.... and let's not forget that part of the deal for individual muslims -- regardless of HOW liberal they may actually be -- is that they act as advertising, as a logo, for islam

by adopting the beard and face veils, tent like garb, etc.


Of course, it's not surprising you haven't addressed these plain facts

because if you did

you would be forced to acknowledge what the rest of us already know

i.e., that the Saudis are putting as many muslims into the West as they can

and as payment for putting those muslims in the West

those muslims MUST repay their part of the deal

by wearing a face veil they never wore before, and beards ditto

.

Now, the people of the West know this

and they object to it

The people of the West don't HAVE to defend themselves against accusations of 'racism'. It's THEIR nation and THEIR culture

What they expect from the immigrants is that they assimilate and not do their utmost to create a muslim nation within the host nation

And of course, Western nations are FULLY justified in these expectations and demands

JUST AS in Islamic nations, the muslims REFUSE to tolerate Western culture and religions

Yes

reply to post by Dock9


The Russians were accused of much the same thing during the cold war, of installing millions of sleeper agents to integrate into America who would rise up and smite us all down at the appointed hour.

They all rose up and bought 7-Elevens, Strip Clubs and Turkish Baths.

So this is pretty standard fare for the be afraid, be very afraid, lets spend billions on the military industrial complex crowd of people who frankly if they were that confident in the appeal of their own systems and customs would realize that yeah, they are really just going to buy a 7-Eleven, Strip Club, Turkish Bath or Pizzeria as soon as they get the chance.

Further it's our own governments that permit the immigration so you really need to look at why your own governments do that.

So you might want to ask why it is that they are doing that, instead of crying boohoo over the whacky idea that 100 billion dollar investment in religion is going to take over countries trillions of dollars in debt, with trillions of dollars in consumer loans and trillion dollar gross national products.

The Saudis make a lot of money on oil, I don't buy it by the way, I won't reward the oil companies, I live green, ride a bike and walk.

However most of the profit on oil is based on speculation that supplies will be cut by war in the Middle East.

To have war in the Middle East seem real guess what you have to be made to do...wait for it...wait for it...here it comes...hate and be afraid of Muslims.

So yeah they invest some chump change in that so you can feel threatened, and the government gladly lets them immigrate so you can feel threatened, so you will support the government's wars in the middle east so we can all feel threatened that our oil supplies might be ended any day.

That you can see that yes the media's are easily corrupted, and paid to manipulate things, but your own government isn't even in on it, while here in America the politicians make every loophole required to make sure the oil companies pay no taxes, and make obscene profits is pretty laughable.

So in reality it's not just the Saudis who are manipulating you and causing your fear, but your own media outlets and your own governments too, which of course display it in things like oh my gosh women wearing burkas, be afraid, rise up, kill them all.

Sorry I don't subsribe to all the fear, the wanting to micro-manage other people, the New World Order, one size fits all thinking.

Sorry you are feeling so insecure by a culturally diverse world.

You might want to stay at home and hide under your bed.

You know what these Islamic face veil does to a women? they cover there smiles and they even scare little children at the stores amercia and canada should have a similar law in place.

reply to post by 23432



Dear 23432,
I am not as adept with the quotation system as you, so I will answer your responses individually in order:

Arab cultural practices do seem out of place in rural, predominant white France. That is kind of pointless to state, but ok. Any practice which isn't the norm when put into a rural environment, which by the definition of rural implies less exposure to the mainstream will be out of place. It could be anything, not just a cultural practice, however you missed my point totally. The "Tagine" is a French national dish, much like the "Tikka Massala" is in the UK. The Arabisation, much like the Indianisation of the UK, happened a long time ago when France decided to colonise those specific parts of North Africa. You always bring back something from your colonies, in this case it was the culture, the architecture (to a certain degree) but not Sharia or Wahabism. Again I refer to the 1st generation Muslims who integrated versus the later more yobbish types who refuse to integrate.

Yes France was the first in establishing it's premise of Liberte, Egalitie, Fraternite. Do you know the history behind it though and how many of the forerunners were murdered by their compatriots? Anyway I digress, I am pretty sure at the time they did not ever believe this idiom would be used to defend the wearing of a garment which in it's own religion is a falacy and outright symbolises (however you want to package it) the oppression of womankind in the Islamic world. You can't take a statement out of context, much like the US constitution is to this day regarding gun laws. This French law is not a legislation against personal choice in what garments can be worn, this is where all of you liberals are going off on a tangent. Read the law, educate yourself about the actual word of the law. It is about wearing this garment in public places (specific targetting), and about trying to stop men forcing women to wear it. The fines for men are insanely huge versus those for women. They are attempting to change a practice, they are attempting to liberate women.

The example of the wearing of the swastika is totally on par. I couldn't find anything more shocking to show the symbolisation here. It is exactly the same, a government refuses for it's citizens to wear something which they deem offensive and furthermore the people of the country deem offensive. End of similarity. Your next comment also made me chuckle in an ironic sense. Sadly, I don't know any other extremist religious group out there who straps bombs to themselves and commits suicide in the belief they are going to be martyrs, do you? So, since these specific groups decide to do this, the link between the fear of the Burqua in a security measure is THEIR fault. If all Muslims, or let's be specific all suicide bombers were not Islamic extremists, then I still think the Burqua would be banned in public for the issues I have mentioned before about women's oppression.

The practice of wearing the Burqua was born out of female rationalisation through image.. i'm sorry, what are you smoking or where did you read that? I think you need to do a little more research about where the practice was born out of. For a start it wasn't born out of the Qu'ran, so yes there you are right it is also about education, but that isn't the responsability of the French government, they already educate masses of illegal immigrants for free, should they now try to educate them on the mistakes within their religion, I think not. You don't know the French half as well as you think you do, yes they have a tendency to perform political U-turns, so does the UK, US and most world governments. Yes they have always been split between left and right, which is part of the French culture, but they have been working (all sides) on this issue for years and finally agreed and put it through. It will not be overturned, and if it is then you'll see masses of French on the streets protesting.

It was not just the French who decided by the way, lots of discussions were had between the government and Muslim groups. Lots of French, Muslim women voted for the wearing of the Burqua to be banned. I'll repeat that, lots of French Muslim women.

Any Muslim women who voluntarily wear this garment do so out of lack of education and following a practice which was "manipulated". I don't care if they are offended and nor does the French or the French government. Ultimately they will either accept or not. At some stage you have to draw the line as I stated many posts back.

Regards,
T

reply to post by Dock9

You make some very good points. I have said for many years now (since the 1970s), that one day we (the European countries) will have to expel the Muslims from our Society if they will not integrate. They have not and they will not. For years the do-gooders/liberals have advocated a "lets leave them in peace and they will leave us in peace" approach. Problem is that the Muslim religion does not believe in live and let live. Under Muslim Law the only choice non-Muslims have is either convert of die. They say it quite openly and quote the Koran as their authority. I know that in the past Christians have committed similar acts in the name of the Bible, but it was a long time ago and Christianity has made many compromises since then. "Turn the other cheek" as they say. The Muslim religion (or at least the modern radical version of it) is, it appears, becoming MORE radical the more of them there are in Western countries and the more we change to suit them.
The time will come when we will either have to bend to their ways or expel them from our midst. I cannot envision Western Society agreeing to get down on its collective knees five times a day and face East, can you? So expulsion is what it will be. It will not be nice when it happens. But what would happen if we did not take action to preserve the status quo (far from perfect though it be), would not be nice either.
You want compulsory prayer umpteen times a day?
You want your daughters to be excluded from School?
You want to be forced to play football in trousers and swim in burkas?
You want the Religious Police rampaging through your streets whipping people for wearing make-up?
You want all music banned? And films? All entertainment seen as evil?
You want women banned from driving a car?

Well I don't and I will not stand idly by fiddling with my Playstation and watching Soaps and football while my civilisation is changed radically all around me. So, come the day, I am quite prepared to do my bit to preserve our way of life, knowing that the alternative is no real life at all. "Cometh the day, cometh the man" they say. Well when "the man" comes and calls I am ready and waiting. And there are many like me. And we will have our say.

I`ve heard all these threats of "WE WILL BE READY TO ACT", for years now. Somehow I think its just a fascist wet dream about starting a race war.

Then will be no race war, we don`t need it because we have full access to all the courts. All we need is a few good human rights lawyers and bingo....ban overturned.

I`m always amused by Islamophobes who insist that muslims don`t want to integrate. These are the same folks who have kept black/brown people at the margins of society for decades, in the case of US, centuries.
Then all of a sudden they want to integrate muslims...I don`t buy that bull for a second.

What they really mean is that they want ethnic minorities, muslims and others, to discard their heritage, culture and identites, and mimic plantation/colony lifestyles, where only the colonialist/slave owners ideas as to who they should be was considered.

Time to face reality, bin your pseudo scholarly nonsense about the clash of civilizations. We are muslims, we are here and where staying.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

Originally posted by Hercules29
reply to post by torqpoc

 

Your poor me/paranoid excuses are irrelevant drab when France has been nuclear testing in the pacific, ingoring the rights of the islanders.

Dear Hercules29,
My poor me/paranoia? I'm sorry but I thought this was a forum for educated people, not borish attitudes. I'm not a Muslim woman, so it's not "poor me" .. I am also not paranoid, however unlike you i'm discussing the OP and the topic.

Anything else you'd like to add to the topic or would you rather stay on the French bashing? Would you like me to state all the atrocities other western countries have committed also?

Get a grip please Hercules.

Regards,
T