Bad pun. Good article though from Steyn.
A victory for multiculti over common sense
By Mark Steyn
I particularly agree with his analysis of the Begum case:
It was the Prime Minister's wife, you'll recall, who last year won a famous court victory for Shabina Begum, as a result of which schools across the land must now permit students to wear the full "jilbab" - ie, Muslim garb that covers the entire body except the eyes and hands. Ms Booth hailed this as "a victory for all Muslims who wish to preserve their identity and values despite prejudice and bigotry". It seems almost too banal to observe that such an extreme preservation of Miss Begum's Muslim identity must perforce be at the expense of any British identity. Nor, incidentally, is Miss Begum "preserving" any identity: she's of Bangladeshi origin, and her adolescent adoption of the jilbab is a symbol of the Arabisation of South Asian (and African and European) Islam that's at the root of so many problems. It's no more part of her inherited identity than my five-year- old dressing up in his head-to-toe Darth Vader costume, to which at a casual glance it's not dissimilar.
Keen impdec followers will recall that the Begum case inspired the second ever impdec post. Here's the original post for those missed it.
27 comments:
Omar was a man who thought he was a mullah...
But he was another imam...
Get Bakri...
Get Bakri
etc.
Is this closure?
School wins Muslim dress appeal
A school which was told it unlawfully excluded a Muslim pupil for wearing a traditional gown has won its appeal at the House of Lords.
The Court of Appeal had said Denbigh High School had denied Shabina Begum the right to manifest her religion in refusing to allow her to wear a jilbab.
But in a unanimous ruling, judges at the House of Lords overturned that.
They said the Luton school had "taken immense pains to devise a uniform policy which respected Muslim beliefs".
It had done so "in an inclusive, unthreatening and uncompetitive way".
This issue is not dead yet, apparently.
How the Niqab Will Enter British Schools
Daniel Pipes' Weblog
January 22, 2007
More on headscarves:
Majority-Muslim Governments Press for Islamic Law in the West
Daniel Pipes' Weblog
March 8, 2007
Uniting to Exclude Saudi Arabian Airlines
by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun
August 21, 2007
Saudi Arabian Airlines (known as Saudia) declares on its English-language website that the kingdom bans "Bibles, crucifixes, statues, carvings, items with religious symbols such as the Star of David." Until the Saudi government changes this detestable policy, its airline should be disallowed from flying into Western airports.
Tribal Custom Means a Husband Never Sees His Wife’s Face
Arab News
RIYADH, 4 September 2003
One of the most remarkable among the many and varied tribal customs that survive in Saudi Arabia is one that forbids anyone at all seeing a woman’s face. In parts of the Al-Kharj region, not even a woman’s husband and children are permitted to see her face uncovered. In interviews with Al-Kharj residents, Sayidaty, a sister publication of Arab News, heard that often the first time even a daughter sees her mother’s face is after the mother’s death.
Go Sarko! The French are way cooler than us, sometimes.
-----------
Sarkozy: Burkha is not welcome in France, 'it's a sign of subservience' for women
Daily Mail
23rd June 2009
President Sarkozy has risked the wrath of Muslims by backing demands for the burkha to be banned. He declared that the full-body religious gown is a sign of the 'debasement' of women.
'In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity,' he said to extended applause in Versailles, at a joint session of France's two houses of parliament. 'The burkha is not a religious sign, it's a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement. It will not be welcome on the territory of the French Republic.'
The president was supporting a weekend call by dozens of French politicians for a parliamentary commission to study whether the burkha, which is growing in popularity in France, should be banned.
He laid out his support for a ban even before the panel has been approved - braving critics who fear the issue could stigmatise Muslims in France. Remarkably, his comments came only hours before he was to host a state dinner with Sheik Hamad Bin Jassem Al Thani of Qatar. Many women in the Gulf state wear Islamic head coverings in public - whether while shopping or driving cars.
France enacted a law in 2004 banning the Islamic headscarf and other conspicuous religious symbols from public schools, sparking fierce debate at home and abroad. France has Western Europe's largest Muslim population, an estimated 5million.
Last year, the country's highest court refused to grant French citizenship to a Moroccan woman who wears a burkha, on the grounds that her Muslim practices were incompatible with French gender equality and secularism laws.
Sarkozy's comments put him at odds with President Barack Obama who, in a speech in Cairo this month, said that the U.S. prized freedom of religion and declared: 'We are not going to tell people what to wear.'
The French leader told Mr Obama in Normandy on June 6 that French principles of equality meant people should not display religious affiliation in state institutions. He added: 'It is not a problem that young girls may choose to wear a veil or a headscarf as long as they have actually chosen to do so, as opposed to this being imposed upon them, be it by their families or by their environment.'
If Sarkozy succeeds France will become the first and only country to ban the wearing of the burkha. It is already banned in schools. In Holland, controversial Dutch MP Geert Wilders, who was banned from entering Britain, tried to introduce a ban, calling the head-dress 'a medieval symbol, a symbol against women'.
But despite Parliament voting in favour, the government was challenged in the courts and it is yet to become law - a sign of the opposition Sarkozy could expect. The issue is highly divisive even within the French government. The junior minister for human rights, Rama Yade, said she was open to a ban if it is aimed at protecting women forced to wear the burkha. But Immigration Minister Eric Besson said a ban would only 'create tensions'.
Al Qaeda vows 'dreadful revenge' on France over plans to ban the burkha
Daily Mail
2 July 2009
Swimmers are told to wear burkinis
Telegraph
British swimming pools are imposing Muslim dress codes in a move described as divisive by Labour MPs.
15 Aug 2009
Under the rules, swimmers – including non-Muslims – are barred from entering the pool in normal swimming attire. Instead they are told that they must comply with the "modest" code of dress required by Islamic custom, with women covered from the neck to the ankles and men, who swim separately, covered from the navel to the knees.
The phenomenon runs counter to developments in France, where last week a woman was evicted from a public pool for wearing a burkini – the headscarf, tunic and trouser outfit which allows Muslim women to preserve their modesty in the water.
JP do you approve of the French evicting a woman for wearing a burkini or do you disapprove of both the British and French's attempt to impose stricter dress codes? Just interested in your own attitude to this issue.
The French eviction was on hygiene grounds. Given the state of British swimming pools you might argue you couldn't make them much dirtier, but it seems a pretty watertight argument (excuse the pun) even if (as might be the case) it's a mask for the real political reasons.
In Britain, to impose Muslim dress on non-Muslims is pure Dhimmitude.
1. Can you explain what the hygiene concerns where?
2. If the eviction had have been justified on cultural or political grounds would you have approved?
1. No, I'm not an expert on these matters. It seems a plausible objection but I don't know the details.
2. Interesting one. In general I'm more of a supporter of the French position on these things than the British, so I'm inclined to a "yes" on this one. FWIW, introspection reveals that (hygiene grounds apart) I couldn't really give a damn what Amish wear in swimming pools, mostly cos they're not trying to impose their views on the rest of society.
So, ideally you would be happy for people to be allowed to wear a Burkini, so long as they didn't impose the same dress code on you? (although, I'm sure you would look very fetching in a burkini JP)
Yep, in general I'm less concerned about wacko religious groups that are non-proselytizing and keep themselves to themselves.
And I'd look good in one of these.
This just in from Twitter:
LDNA London pool has scrapped a dress code for Muslim sessions requiring women to be covered from neck to ankle http://bit.ly/DoKMe
Very pleasantly suprised. This attitude is rarely to be found in these debates:
Malcolm Wicks, Labour MP for Croydon North, said asking non-Muslims to dress up to swim was not fair: "I just hope some common sense can prevail here."
Hang on... as per the article, there are muslim only male and female classes. Surely that's fair enough?
I have been refused entry to my local swimming pool because it was being used for kids sessions.
On occasion, there are, for example, pregnant aquarobics classes. One presumes all attendees are expected to be, at very least, female.
If you're having a muslim-female-only session (once a week, for an hour and a half, to cater for a section of the local community), it might be illegal to say 'non-muslims aren't welcome', but surely its perfectly reasonable to say 'you must wear (orthodox) muslim dress to attend this session'.
There is, really, no story here.
Having researched the rules of French swimming pools it now seems much more likely that the hygiene objection is not a front - often they don't even allow shorts, let alone full body covering, in the water.
See this tourist's comments:
I know this one, after arguing the toss with the French pool attendant on holiday he explained in his best English, ''You have to wear trunks because what the French resorts have found is people wear their swimming shorts all day at the beach, then the bar, then shopping, then get back to the pool and dive in it wearing a filthy pair of shorts, leaving sand and all sorts of other muck at the bottom of the pool''. Makes sense if you think about it, I stopped arguing after that.
I think the issue there is clothing that can be worn outside of the pool (e.g. shorts) - not sure if the same can be said of the burquini. (Btw - I add this only in the interest of accuracy. I have no particular desire to defend OR ban burquinis.)
Reasonable point. Mind you, the way people write rules for public areas, it's far more likely that the rule is "you're only allowed in if you're wearing X, Y or Z" than a rule that requires a judgement call on where else someone's clothing might be worn in general, or has been worn that day.
Stats on the use of supposedly Islamic wear in crimes, eg Jordan offers a glimpse into the potential for niqabs and burqas as illegal accessories: one news report indicates that 50 people committed 170 crimes using Islamic garments during the past two years, or roughly one incident every four days, a crime wave that has prompted some Jordanians to call for restricting or even banning these Islamic head coverings.
Niqabs and Burqas - The Veiled Threat Continues
by Daniel Pipes
Jerusalem Post
September 2, 2009
I assume this is not Mohammed PBUH denying the charge that he, Mohammed PBUH, is a warlord.
Hoteliers charged after row with guest
Guardian
Monday 21 September 2009
A pair of Christian hoteliers who argued with a Muslim guest have been charged with a "religiously aggravated" public order offence. Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang run the Bounty House Hotel in Aintree, Liverpool. The incident took place in March when a guest came down to breakfast in a hijab. It is alleged Mr Vogelenzang said the prophet Muhammad was a warlord. He denies the claim. It is also claimed that Mrs Vogelenzang described the hijab as a form of bondage. The guest complained to police and the couple will appear before Liverpool magistrates on December 8.
I'm reading Ayaan Hirsi Ali's volume 2 of her autobiography, "Nomad", and there's no question that Sarkozy is 100% correct in his observation reported below.
---------
Council of Europe votes against ban on burka
Telegraph
23 Jun 2010
MPs from 47 countries have unanimously voted against a general ban on the wearing of the burka in public.
The Parliamentary Assembly of Europe's human rights watchdog, the Council of Europe, passed a resolution warning that if governments imposed such a ban they would be denying women ''who genuinely and freely desire to do so'' their right to cover their faces.
But while the Assembly opposed a general ban, it left the door open for targeted laws against the burka, pointing out that legal restrictions may be justified ''for security purposes, or where the public or professional functions of individuals require their religious neutrality, or that their face can be seen''.
The vote came in Strasbourg amid continuing controversy in France over efforts to introduce a general burka ban.
The Muslim Council of Britain has attacked President Nicolas Sarkozy as ''patronising and offensive'' after he declared: ''The burka is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience. We cannot accept to have in our country women who are prisoners behind netting, cut off from all social life, deprived of identity.''
Belgium's lower house of parliament has already voted unanimously for such a ban. If unamended by the upper house - the Senate - the ban would be the first of its kind in Europe, introducing into Belgium's criminal code a prohibition on the wearing in public places of ''clothing that hides the face''.
The resolution, approved by national MPs representing their countries on the human rights body, acknowledged that the veiling of women is often perceived as ''a symbol of the subjugation of women to men''. But a general ban would impede the rights of women freely wishing to cover up.
However, the parliamentarians added: ''No woman should be compelled to wear religious apparel by her community or family. Any act of oppression, sequestration or violence constitutes a crime that must be punished by law.''
The resolution was part of a report on Islam, Islamism and Islamophobia, which also called on European governments to work to educate Muslim women, their families and communities on their human rights and to encourage them to take part in ''public and professional life''.
It also called on Switzerland to repeal as soon as possible its general ban on the construction of minarets, which it described as discriminatory.
Syria bans face veils at universities
BBC News
19 July 2010
Niqab Security Outrages at Canadian Airports
by Daniel Pipes
August 3, 2010
eloquently put
France: Burqa Ban Goes Into Effect
Hudson NY
by Soeren Kern
April 14, 2011
France's much-debated "burqa ban" entered into force on April 11. The new law, which prohibits the wearing of Islamic body-covering burqas and face-covering niqabs in all public spaces in France, comes amid rising frustration that the country's estimated 6.5 million Muslims are not integrating into French society.
...
[Sarkozy] also fired Abderrahmane Dahmane, a Frenchman of Algerian descent he hired in January to promote "diversity," after the appointee openly attacked the president's views on Islam in France. Dahmane now says Muslims in France should wear a five-pointed green star to protest against what he called "the fascist climate that evokes the sombre history of the Occupation in France, which sent thousands of Jews by train to the death camps."
Some French commentators have pointed out the twisted irony of Muslims equating themselves to the Jews in the Holocaust, considering that Muslims for centuries imposed distinctive clothing on Jews and other non-Muslims, and served as the inspiration for the yellow Star of David that Nazis forced wartime Jews to wear..
The green star idea is "totally grotesque," says Richard Prasquier, head of the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions in France (CRIF), a Jewish umbrella group. Prasquier, who supported the April 5 debate as a valid response to the concerns of French voters, told Agence France-Presse: "It is unfortunately part of a wider movement that mixes everything up and makes everything equate to the Holocaust."
Post a Comment