Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

So Belgium will become the first European country to ban the burka in public places. This leads the way for other countries to do the same. However, you sit and watch the human rights people and the pc brigades go into a flap now. Personally I think it's a good thing and there's the bigger issue of countries now taking a stand and basically saying 'you wanna live here? live our way'.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 59626.html

I really don't see what the big deal is ? If someone wants to dress a certain way let them. Your allowed to tatto you face completely and do all sorts of other weird and wacky things, Like implant horns and vampire teeth. Yet something like things bugs them to no end ? What's next maybe they should ban make up aswell ?

"We are the first country to break through the chain that has kept countless women enslaved," said Denis Ducarme, a Belgian Liberal party MP. ????? Did they ever bother asking the women in question if they wanted this, could be that they prefer to dress this way.

Anywho just another example of shoving down western values down the throats of people who just might not need or want them.

Chocs when you say

Personally I think it's a good thing and there's the bigger issue of countries now taking a stand and basically saying 'you wanna live here? live our way'.

I know its not just you and many think way so I'm not singling you out, but arn't many of you also complain to no end when you have to abide by the simplest of laws when living in other countries, UAE for example which is quite liberal among many to start off with. Don't you think this is just a wee bit hypocritical ?

Having said all this is. The full face veil or living in belgium is not a requirement in Islam aswell. Just that when lamenting freedom of everything you ban a certain dresscode under false pretence, kinda sends out the wrong message.

Personally I think it's a good thing and there's the bigger issue of countries now taking a stand and basically saying 'you wanna live here? live our way'.

Remember the issue is not the burqa(which is a piece of cloth) but the status of women in the society..To me the women living in burqa have more freedom and honour then the western women who have their mind, body, beauty,female qualities being sold and traded all the time for material gains of capital/power holders...I feel they are being badly treated and used under liberty propoganda, and I think this is huge crime against women' nature and honour..

So the western nations ban the burka but forget the topless western females and tourists.
Burqa is banned but western female tourists who travel for sex... ie. sex toursim is cool..they are enchancing the local economies!

Burqa is banned but massage brothels are not..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl ... 652533.stm

The burkah that covers the face except for the eyes should not be allowed where there are safety and security concerns. Like driving a car or walking into monitored areas with high security cameras like banks or certain government building..etc. Imagine a man entering a bank with a cloak and a face mask. Police would be called immediately. There should be no difference if it’s a woman.

I really enjoy reading the justifications for this (or similar) bands. It makes me chuckle.

So, Tom is arguing that if batman or zorro walked into a bank, the police would be called. Well, perhaps so - but that would be an interesting charge, 'banking whilst dressed like a superhero'!

As for women posing as great a security risk for choosing to cover up in public, well - again perhaps there has been a spate of Burka-clad larcenies that I've been unaware of.

But the funniest justification has to be that this law is in the interest of women who choose to cover up. I don't get the logic - telling women they can't come out in public and wear what they want to wear, seems to be patronising to the extreme and ignores the blatant fact that it is actually saying to these women that they should stay out of sight and not mix in society - if they want to maintain their desired level of privacy.

But hey, perhaps the Belgian law-makers do know best and the women should just accept that they can't decide for themselves what to wear in public.


Also, I wonder how this will be enforced - will women be arrested for wearing a veil in a park or other public place?


Cheers,
Shafique

DD, to answer your question, the reason people like me get so annoyed is that as expats we come to countries like the UAE are constantly get 'respect our laws/culture/way of life' rammed down our throats, yet the same people saying this blatantly ignore the same when they go to our countries and literally 'enforce' their way of life on us. It's so hypocritical. So yes I fully agree with issues like this and the banning of building more minarets etc etc. As the Australians also say, it's our way or the highway.

With regards to the burkha issue, the main reasoning behind it is security issues. If muslim women choose to wear a headscarf, then I don't think there's any issues with that, but to cover the entire face is unneccessary.

-- Sun May 02, 2010 9:03 am --

Tom Jones wrote:The burkah that covers the face except for the eyes should not be allowed where there are safety and security concerns. Like driving a car or walking into monitored areas with high security cameras like banks or certain government building..etc. Imagine a man entering a bank with a cloak and a face mask. Police would be called immediately. There should be no difference if it’s a woman.

Exactly! No one is allowed to wear crash helmets, hoodie tops, balaclavas etc in shops, banks etc so why should these women be exempt.

Chocoholic wrote:Exactly! No one is allowed to wear crash helmets, hoodie tops, balaclavas etc in shops, banks etc so why should these women be exempt.

Umm - perhaps because they aren't a security risk?

But if banks don't want burka wearing women to enter their premises, then this is somewhat understandable.

However, the law passed (according to the BBC):

The law would ban any clothing that obscures the identity of the wearer in places like parks and on the street.

Focusing on what a bank may want is somewhat missing the point...which is even more strange when one re-reads the first line of the first post above!?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Focusing on what a bank may want is somewhat missing the point...which is even more strange when one re-reads the first line of the first post above!?

I agree for 100 per cent. Is bank's money more important than human lives? Terrorists can set off an explosion everywhere like they did in Moscow's metro recently. If those ladies had hidden their faces behind burkha they and their accomplices would not have been traceable.

Shaf, I think you miss the point a little. My point was NO ONE is allowed in public outlets with their face fully covered. There are stickers on doors of post offices, off licences, shops etc expressly stating remove helmets, hoods etc, so why should these women be exempt - especiilly when anyone could be underneath there. Case in point, the guy that managed to flee the country dressed in a burka.

I don't think anyone needs to cover themselves and hide who they are, epsecially in this day and age when there is so much mistrust among people, for obvious reasons, openess is only a good thing.

Chocoholic wrote:DD, to answer your question, the reason people like me get so annoyed is that as expats we come to countries like the UAE are constantly get 'respect our laws/culture/way of life' rammed down our throats, yet the same people saying this blatantly ignore the same when they go to our countries and literally 'enforce' their way of life on us. It's so hypocritical. So yes I fully agree with issues like this and the banning of building more minarets etc etc. As the Australians also say, it's our way or the highway.

Re the highlighted text. You have issues with the UAE asking that expats respect the laws of the land, yet you want to push your "lifestyle" onto the UAE saying that laws are ridiculous, nonsense, backward or outdated. You for one tell tourists or new expats to ignore the laws!!! You are doing the very thing that you claim is being done by other people in other countries. That, my dear, is hypocritical.

There is a difference in being an expat and a citizen of a country Chocs, or don't you know the difference?

If you find the laws here in the UAE too restricting and infringe on your right to do as you please, then you should really think about going back to your country. Clearly you have no use for Dubai, its laws, or the people. All you spout is negative, negative, negative rubbish. That is a clear indication that you have overstayed and need to go. Your "use by" date expired a long time ago. I'm sure the UAE can take the position of Australia: it's the UAE way, or the highway. So maybe its time you hit the road Jack.

Chocoholic wrote:Shaf, I think you miss the point a little. My point was NO ONE is allowed in public outlets with their face fully covered.

You're missing my point - the ban is on public places, such as parks and the street.

Chocoholic wrote:I don't think anyone needs to cover themselves and hide who they are, epsecially in this day and age when there is so much mistrust among people, for obvious reasons, openess is only a good thing.

Yes, I'll happily fight for your right to think this - but you will excuse me if I don't agree with legislation on what women should wear, especially as I haven't heard a convincing argument yet why a woman shouldn't be able to play with her children in a park whilst wearing a burka, and (for that matter) why banks will want to stop them banking.

Cheers,
Shafique

The burkah that covers the face except for the eyes should not be allowed where there are safety and security concerns.

Body-covering veil is burqa, face- covering veil is called niqab…
Why is it that burqa/niqab becomes a concern of safety in european nations while it is not in arab nations?
Why is it that in sharia countries where there is no war, they can deal with security problems and criminals such as child abusers, murderers, thieves and terrorists much better than their "advanced" counterparts in western nations?

Like driving a car or walking into monitored areas with high security cameras like banks or certain government building..etc.

The same should be a concern in Muslim countries since they too have banks and government buildings however, despite this they are least concerned about them, with your logic shouldn’t the banks in ME be bombed every day and hour and have lowest security concerns of amongst all nations in the world?

Imagine a man entering a bank with a cloak and a face mask. Police would be called immediately. There should be no difference if it’s a woman.

Why is it a growing concern in european countries? ie.and not in Vanezuella,Japan, Brazil etc. can you justify this using any sensible argument?

DD, to answer your question, the reason people like me get so annoyed is that as expats we come to countries like the UAE are constantly get 'respect our laws/culture/way of life' rammed down our throats, yet the same people saying this blatantly ignore the same when they go to our countries and literally 'enforce' their way of life on us.

There is misleading information in your quote..The way Muslim countries are ruled as they are dates back as much as 1400 years. Nothing is introduced just recently; sharia is governing law of islam for human life and justice. In certain ways Europe was similar in Middle Ages before industrilisation took off. What happened then that the atheist and Darwinist propaganda become the slogan of everyone ironicly with the rise of capatilist robber barrans?

So there is no hypcrisy or sharia laws being rammed down your throats in muslim countries, when you make a job contract for work in muslim countries, you accept the life style that comes in that particular country, even as a visiting tourist..

I don’t understand why the banner qualities of western democracies, such as human rights, freedom of choice becomes two folded story or hypocrisy and execution of lies and cheats wherever there is an issue of islam or rise of islam, its knowledge and culture becoming apparent and spreading. (It’s a religion, it’s for people and europeans themselves by choice have the right to become muslims and pratise it the way they like it)
Remember the banning of burqa or niqab or minarets in Europe were never a serious issue until recent years or months when europe was living its golden years. This behaviour, all of a sudden become a clear sign of rejecting everthing symbolize islam or spread of islam. Today they’ll start with burqa/niqab, tommorrow they’ll move on to banning headscarfs, construction of mosques,quran, arabic language…etc. etc. In democracies there is never an end to suit laws to the needs of those who hold power, while minimising the rights of minority or those who speak against.

I am afraid, in my opinion what we will further see is that the more euro economies and population decline, the worse their attitude towards islam/muslims and muslims nations will become fierce due to close demographic lands. This is the only reason why I think almost all governments of europe trying hard and pushing policies to assimilate muslims in europe, be it cultural or religious when it can only be on natural will rather than force.

I kinda like these childish quotes coming from so called presidents/governments of “advanced” unshakable Europe…

Fiercely secular France is on the cusp of introducing a ban of the face-covering veil, which President Nicolas Sarkozy has said is an affront to the country's values and denigrates women.

In January, Denmark's center-right government called the burqa and niqab out of step with Danish values. However, it held off imposing a ban after finding that only two or three women in the entire country actually wore the niqab and only around 200 wear burqa -- out of a population of 5.5 million.

The wearing of traditional conservative Islamic dress is regarded by many Belgians as a refusal to assimilate into Western society...
It’s somewhat ironic that Belgium would become the first European country with a full federal ban. The percentage of Muslims living here is just 3.6 percent, compared with France’s 10 percent, or the Netherlands' 5.8 percent. Of the roughly 375,000 people who identify themselves as Muslim in Belgium, it’s estimated that several dozen cover their faces.

The measure’s sponsor, Daniel Bacquelaine, head of the French-speaking Liberal Party, said he was proud to lead the world in barring the garment, explaining that the small number of people the law could apply to is irrelevant.
“It’s not a problem of the number of people who wear a burqa,” he said. “It’s really a symbol to say clearly if we want to live together in a free society, we need to recognize each other.”
Bacquelaine suggested that everyone can appreciate how important it is, for example, that teachers can tell children are being picked up after school by the person who really is their mother, or for a bank teller to be able to identify the person trying to withdraw money from an account.
The lawmaker heatedly rejected accusations the bill is anti-Islamic or anti-female. On the contrary, he said it would help all Muslims, and especially women, integrate into society. “I think it’s not really a choice to wear a burqa. If we forbid the veil on the street and in the shops they obtain more freedom to live,” he explained.

I wonder if this Bacquelaine is a happy soul and is convienced with his own alleged arguments…He doesn’t yet know that noone really has to go inside a bank to withdraw cash etc..I find hardline nationalism is the real barrier between dialog and communication of different ethnicities and religions when we are infact all sisters and brothers originating from the same root and same creation.

Chocoholic wrote:No one is allowed to wear crash helmets, hoodie tops, balaclavas etc in shops, banks etc so why should these women be exempt.

The signage for not permitting the wearing of those items are at the discretion of the owners. It's not the LAW.

As much as wearing a mini skirt with a tight top on SZR doesn't show much respect to local culture, wearing a burka in Brussels does the same. Don't expect too much respect from the locals. Being able to see someones face and hand shaking is part of Western culture. If you donot like it...

But how many women in Belgium wear a burka anyways? Less than 100? Doesn't seem to be a big problemo, looks more like a political statement. Anyways, give it ten more years and Belgium will cease to exist anyways.

Any news on the ban of circumcision in Denmark while we are at it?

-- Sun May 02, 2010 4:56 pm --

desertdudeshj wrote:Anywho just another example of shoving down western values down the throats of people who just might not need or want them.

It surprises you that law making in a Western country is based on Western values???

shafique wrote:telling women they can't come out in public and wear what they want to wear, seems to be patronising to the extreme

Huh?

Berrin wrote:So there is no hypcrisy or sharia laws being rammed down your throats in muslim countries, when you make a job contract for work in muslim countries, you accept the life style that comes in that particular country, even as a visiting tourist..

Allrighty...

-- Sun May 02, 2010 4:58 pm --

desertdudeshj wrote:Your allowed to tatto you face completely and do all sorts of other weird and wacky things

Mind you, certain tats are also forbidden and punishable!

Don't expect too much respect from the locals. Being able to see someones face and hand shaking is part of Western culture. If you donot like it...

It’s not the mini skirt with a tight top or the burqa itself that gets the respect (they are piece of cloth) it’s the person who is able to carry their body and its parts in dignified and the most moral ways that get the appreciation and approval of society. Respecting a person and how they present themselves should not be conditional to their appearance or customs, be it religious or cultural.

Today in the west if society has no respect towards such indivudals and stays prejudice than I feel there is rather deep and rooted problems as far as human values or the role of religion concerned.

Being able to see someones face and hand shaking is part of Western culture…

It wasn’t and it had to become part of industrialized culture while religion was given a way to loose its influence.
Haven’t you ever watched tv series on medieval europe where females use facial masks held by hand or net like black veils droping down from their hats. Today you can still see the same with bridal veils. Have you ever thought why nuns dress code is similar to muslims?..

It only takes few minutes or say some hours for someone to think and confront themselves with their history and religious identity to undestand today’s social dilemma, therefore find ways to resolve what seems to be problems when they are infact not.

Berrin wrote: Respecting a person and how they present themselves should not be conditional to their appearance or customs, be it religious or cultural.

Many will disagree with you

Berrin wrote:Haven’t you ever watched tv series on medieval europe where females use facial masks held by hand or net like black veils droping down from their hats. Today you can still see the same with bridal veils. Have you ever thought why nuns dress code is similar to muslims?

This thread is about showing your face in modern day Western society in public. Not about the dark ages or weddings.

Yes a lot of people will not agree with me if arrogance, superiority complex coupled with ultra secular nationalism get in the way of fair and rational thought.

This thread is about showing your face in modern day Western society in public. Not about the dark ages or weddings

.

I agree with you..that's why it's always the politicians(male) who have to have their first say and lay their dirty hands on womanly/religious issues in the first place.

Can you advocate that europe wasn't modern says 50 years ago and why it has to become modern today...
The muslims will live islam the same way for centuries to come. What do you think the future of Europe will be if the politicians continue the same al bullshite?

I can just see new saddams being born again, this time in atheist christian identity? will be real fun to watch and witness...

Flying Dutchman wrote:
But how many women in Belgium wear a burka anyways? Less than 100? Doesn't seem to be a big problemo, looks more like a political statement. Anyways, give it ten more years and Belgium will cease to exist anyways.

The news reports say only 30 women in Belgium will be affected.

I still, I really haven't yet seen a good argument why women shouldn't be allowed to play with their children in the park while wearing a burka, and I'm still wondering how this will be enforced anyway.

Cheers,
Shafique

Well c’mon guys! Be realistic!

I don’t think this law was made to infuriate Moslems. It has anything to do with Moslem values or Western values. It’s a matter of security.

We live in a different century and a different era!!

With the increasing threat of terrorism by women (as in the recent incidents in Russia, Iraq, and other places) governments have the right to take all the necessary measures they see fit to protect their citizens.

A person who is fully covered is completely unidentifiable, and that person simply poses a certain security risk to authorities. If such a person commits a crime and flees the scene, or parks a car filled with explosives and walks away, neither security cameras nor any witnesses can identify that person.

This law is not really targeting Moslems. Any non-Moslem criminal or terrorist could hide under the niqab to commit his or her crime.

This law may save lives and property in the long run! You never know!

Moreover, I don't see why the big fuss if it only affects 30 women!!!

Tom Jones wrote:I don’t think this law was made to infuriate Moslems. It has anything to do with Moslem values or Western values. It’s a matter of security.

Seriously Tom ? Tom your a reasonable chap man, think about it.

With the increasing threat of terrorism by women (as in the recent incidents in Russia, Iraq, and other places) governments have the right to take all the necessary measures they see fit to protect their citizens.

I don't remember the Russian Women to be burkha wearing ?

A person who is fully covered is completely unidentifiable, and that person simply poses a certain security risk to authorities. If such a person commits a crime and flees the scene, or parks a car filled with explosives and walks away, neither security cameras nor any witnesses can identify that person.

Again, seriously bro. What did all the criminals do before the burkha ? Whats next mimes in parks ?They are in full whiteface makeup. They should be banned from doing that aswell. Men or women wearing wigs and big Sunshades, helmets, bonnets. Hoods, scarfs you name it. Seriously this security risk excuse has more holes in it than a seive.

This law is not really targeting Moslems. Any non-Moslem criminal or terrorist could hide under the niqab to commit his or her crime.

What about all these people, they shouldn't be allowed to step out of the house without a police escort. Security theart face coverd an all !

It's because Russia is not Belgium or other Western country. Wearing burkha those Moslem (let's call things by their own names) terrorists would not have gone 100 meter without checking ID by police.

Thats another point and its scary. Is that if someone is really intent on doing something he/she/they will find a way. Burkha wearing or not.

Also these people would want to be as inconspicuous as possible and not stand out in the crowd by wearing a burkha on the streets of Europe !

DD,

1- I cited Russia not because of the burkah, but to make the point that also women carry out terrorist attacks not just men.

2- If these tattooed guys commit a crime, they would be picked up in no time wherever they go afterwards. They can’t easily remove their tattoos like a woman can with a burkah. Even if they used removable tattoos or paint, they could still be identifiable thru body shape, head shape, ears , eyes, and other facial features. But if they were completely covered from head to toe (with flowing clothes), they would be nearly impossible to identify.

3- The faces of people who wear headscarves, wigs, helmets, …etc are still visible. And I’m sure this law would also apply to people who might wear full hoods covering the entire head except for the eye slits, if there are such people anyway!!

4- May I ask you a question? If covering a woman’s face is mandatory in Islam, how come nearly 90% of Moslem women do not cover their face. The only women I have seen who totally cover are mostly in KSA and those from a few ultra conservative families in other parts of the Moslem world. So if about 90% do not cover their face, it is apparently not a sin. As such, the full cover looks to me to be more like a cultural thing rather than a religious one???

Read my first reply on this thread ( last paragraph to be exact ) regarding your question No 4. And your correct the Niquab is more cultral than religious, but again I find it ironic to say the least specially when it " becomes a security risk " What would you say about a masquerade ball or halloween ! Ban them all I say Really Tom this line of argument is as lame as a one legged man in an ass kicking contest.

desertdudeshj wrote:I
Having said all this is. The full face veil or living in belgium is not a requirement in Islam aswell. Just that when lamenting freedom of everything you ban a certain dresscode under false pretence, kinda sends out the wrong message.

Tom Jones wrote:
4- May I ask you a question? If covering a woman’s face is mandatory in Islam, how come nearly 90% of Moslem women do not cover their face. The only women I have seen who totally cover are mostly in KSA and those from a few ultra conservative families in other parts of the Moslem world. So if about 90% do not cover their face, it is apparently not a sin. As such, the full cover looks to me to be more like a cultural thing rather than a religious one???

Unless you married an ugly one and it's for public safety!



Knight

In that case she would be required to wear the Niqaub at all times 24/7

P.S : What about Ninjas ? Will they be feeling left out too from soiciety ???

But let's think about this - would a terrorist really use a Burka today as a disguise?

Wouldn't it make more sense to just do a 'mission impossible' and don a wig, false boobs, some face prosthetics etc, coloured contacts etc etc?

Therefore, I'm still waiting for a cogent argument why a woman should be prevented from playing with her kids in a Belgium park if she wants to wear a burka. C'mon - either admit this is indefensible or come up with an argument.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Wouldn't it make more sense to just do a 'mission impossible' and don a wig, false boobs, some face prosthetics etc, coloured contacts etc etc?

It's too difficalt for Moslem terrorists, who in reality are poor peasants or unemployed. More suitable for bank robber.

Red Chief wrote:

shafique wrote:Wouldn't it make more sense to just do a 'mission impossible' and don a wig, false boobs, some face prosthetics etc, coloured contacts etc etc?

It's too difficalt for Moslem terrorists, who in reality are poor peasants or unemployed. More suitable for bank robber.

See, the jokes still keep on coming (I said above I enjoy reading the funny comments).

So, will anyone come up with a good excuse for stopping a lady from playing with her kids in the park if she decides to wear a burka.


(But I agree with RC on the point that many of the recent attacks have been carried out by numpties - sometimes these have been non-Muslim numpties - take yesterday's laughable attempt at a car bomb in NYC for example. Bin Laden is an engineer, and the 9/11 attacks didn't use anyone who looked overtly religious - let alone burka clad... but we'll let that one slide, shall we.. )

Cheers,
Shafique

Bora Bora wrote:

Chocoholic wrote:No one is allowed to wear crash helmets, hoodie tops, balaclavas etc in shops, banks etc so why should these women be exempt.

The signage for not permitting the wearing of those items are at the discretion of the owners. It's not the LAW.

er yes it is actually! Bora, quite frankly I don't care if people are a visitor or a resident of my home country, why do you think we're all leaving? Because we're sick to death of people taking over and enforcing their values and ways of life on us! FFS we're not even allowed to celebrate St George's Day or Christmas properly anymore - that I have a major issue with. Yet the UAE embraces all cultures and celebrates all the religious holidays, regardless of whom they belong to, and that is a great thing. I know exactly what I can and can't wear here and what is appropriate in certain places and what isn't. And your arguments are invalid, when you see the number of muslims and locals in bars/clubs etc, please some of the arab women dress in a far more salacious way than most westerners - Lebanese and Egyptians are classic examples.

You can think what you like, but the UAE has many many positives and trumps many European countries.

Anyway like I said, it's a brave, bold and good step forward and I hope the rest of Europe follows in their footsteps, because believe me people are sick to death of it.

And nowhere in the Koran does it say woman should cover their faces, hair either, so that's all a moot point. It simply states that MEN and WOMEN should dress modestly shoulders to knees. The whole women covering completely is enforced by sad little men with big insecurities.