Widespread support for burka ban in Canada

January 24, 2012

The precedent for this does not exist: If there is threat to people’s rights then free expression does not apply. The Marxists used the same argument to limit free expression. What proportion of fashion limits can a free society really have? My opinion is this is not how things should be dealt with. As you can see here in the article these people think Islam is not at fault, but Islam is really where the law can categorize as being violent. If we do not accept the truth about Islam then a free society can not… and will not exist. When a ideology is violent then it is acceptable to intervene, but simply saying you are protecting women and ignoring the cause of the problem is a mistake. Sadly feminism is taking priority over real human rights here.

TORONTO – A month after Canada banned Muslim women from covering their faces during citizenship ceremonies, Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney says the policy has won widespread support.
Speaking at a Muslim Canadian Congress event honouring his “courageous decision,” Mr. Kenney said polling shows that eight out of 10 Canadians agreed with the decision while only 14% were opposed.
“It is only a sign of respect for your fellow citizens, when you are pledging to them your commitment to live in a community with them, to show your face and who you are and that your pledge is heartfelt and authentic,” he said.
He said he would not act on suggestions to hold separate citizenship ceremonies for Muslim women who cover their faces in public. “We are all becoming Canadians together,” he said. “We are not going to start segregating our citizenship ceremonies.”
The Minister characterized the new rule as part of a broader strategy to strengthen the value of citizenship in Canada, which he said has the highest rate of naturalization of any country in the developed world. While the audience gathered at a Toronto hotel spoke mostly in support of the niqab ban, one woman said she was “extremely offended” by the comments she had heard. “If somebody believes in it [the niqab] then it’s their right to practise it,” said Fatema Dada of the Canadian Muslim Lawyers Association.
Mr. Kenney responded that taking an oath was a public act and could not be done in a way that hides identity. He also recalled meeting Sheikh Mohamed Tantawi, Egypt’s top Muslim authority, who told him face coverings were not a religious requirement.
“He clarified for me that people in the West who think this is a religious obligation do not understand Islam law. So I am not going to second-guess the most pre-eminent Sharia authority in the Sunni world.”
There was a tense moment at the event when a woman dressed in a burka approached the Minister and tore off the blue cloth to reveal she was actually author and women’s rights activist Raheel Raza. Writer Tarek Fatah also briefly wore a burka hand puppet.
“The niqab or burka is a political tool by Islamists who wish to segregate Muslims into religious ghettos, cut off from mainstream society,” said Farzana Hassan of the Muslim Canadian Congress. “Islamists consider women who do not cover their heads and faces, which constitutes the vast majority, as sinners and lesser Muslims.”

Burka Mermaids

November 4, 2011
(EOZ (h/t jzaik)) From ANSAMed: The shapes of the mermaids that embellish the fountain of Zeus in the centre of Alexandria have been deemed “inappropriate” by the Salafist Al Nour (Light) party, which decided to “veil” them completely with a sheet during a meeting yesterday evening. The incident, which was reported by the website of the Al Masri Al Youm newspaper, has unleashed a wave of comment and disbelief on Twitter, where the paper posted pictures “before and after the niqab” of the fountain of the sirens, upon which an enormous placard carries the words: “Egyptian women devote themselves to their husbands and their nation”. Political leaders of the party, which is at the head of a coalition of Islamist parties that will stand in the forthcoming Egyptian elections from November 28, had recently announced that they were against the statues, deeming them contrary to Islamic tradition, the newspaper reports. “Covering a statue of sirens will certainly lead us to Paradise. I can’t wait,” was the ironic reaction of one Twitter user.
Here’s the before and after picture (right to left 🙂 )

Brussels: Islamic male attacks police for stopping wife

October 25, 2011
(Eye) Belgium has implemented a ban on the wearing of the burka since the 23rd of July this year. It was the reason why two policemen, who spotted a woman wearing the burka, stopped her and asked for her ID papers. Her husband, angry that the police dare stop his wife, physically attacked one of the policemen while informing his wife to go home.

No Bikinis in Russian Beach

October 2, 2011
beach-bombing-nemtsovaNamed “Mountain Woman Beach,” it’s a gated community, open to women, girls and boys younger than 6 years of age. Visitors can rest in comfortable wooden shelters to escape the heat or swim in the ocean without the burden of burkinis. The beach is proof enough, if any were needed, of the rise of Islam in Russia. It’s also a security measure to protect women from a recent, gruesome spate of bombings at the Caspian shore. (9-11 Do more than Never Forget-Stop ISLAM)

Jihadis Threaten Belgium Over Burqa Ban

August 1, 2011

A typical call for interfaith dialogue from the al-Qaeda-linked Shumukh al-Islam forumA typical call for interfaith dialogue from the al-Qaeda-linked Shumukh al-Islam forum

“O Allah, destroy their buildings with explosives, their cars with booby-traps, and their men with sniper rifles,” Contributor, al-Qaeda-linked Shumukh al-Islam Jihad Forum

A terrorism-monitoring organization said Friday that jihadists are threatening Belgium with terrorism for having imposed a burqa ban.
In an email to subscribers, the United States-based SITE Monitoring Service quoted posts on jihadist internet sites as urging the bombing, torture and killing of Belgians. In its introduction to the posts, SITE made no assessment of the severity of the threat.
According to SITE, on July 24 — the day after Belgium’s burqa ban took effect — someone called Faz al-Shaheed posted a comment on the Shumukh al-Islam forum saying, “This is what your parliament unanimously decided except for one representative, to ban the wearing of the veil in your small country. So, by this decision you have ignited unto yourselves a fire without an extinguisher. … I urge our Muslim brethren in Belgium to do what they can of bombing, destroying, torturing and assassinating them, because they are the ones who started it.”
That post drew several like-minded comments on the burqa ban in response, SITE said.
“O Allah, destroy their buildings with explosives, their cars with booby-traps, and their men with sniper rifles,” someone using the name Fashudu al-Withaq wrote, the monitoring organization said.
Another poster, using the name Asad al-Malhama, reportedly gave technical suggestions for making a bomb, then added, “Don’t forget to add nails and shrapnel on the outside in order to cause the largest number of death and injuries to the criminal enemies of Allah.”
Another poster urged that “gifts” for France not be forgotten, as France was the first country in Europe to ban the veil.
Belgium’s ban on wearing the burqa took effect July 23, having been overwhelmingly approved by the parliament. Its supporters said it was needed as a security measure.
A lawyer representing two Belgian women who wear the burqa has appealed to a court to declare the ban unconstitutional.

“Don’t forget to add nails and shrapnel on the outside in order to cause the largest number of death and injuries to the criminal enemies of Allah.”

This isn’t your typical keyboard warrior/Jihadi Kidz talking shop. The password-protected Shumukh al-Islam forum is closely linked to al-Qaeda, and in addition to the usual incitement to violence against the kuffar, the site boasts training courses, manuals and other resources for the well-connected Jihadi.
So these are not idle threats. But it’s doubtful anyone will notice until something bad happens. Despite this story revealing real, deadly threats and violent incitement against an EU member state for imposing a burqa ban, it has been buried by Western mainstream media. in fact is has received much greater coverage in Islamic countries.
Despite the ‘nose-on-your-face’ evidence of Islam’s supremacist onslaught against the values of the West, most media and élite commentators seem to prefer to pin the blame for global jihad on blond, ‘white supremacist fundamentalist Christians’.
[Source: AP]

…and the media is still trying to pass that Anders fellow off as a Christian even though his manifesto said he would work with Muslims. The priority is clear!


Lebanese politician describes veiled Saudi Women as resembling black garbage bags, riots ensue

March 16, 2011
covered women
black-bags.jpg
cheap-monday-hefty-bag.jpg
but I prefer….

this Trash Bag to Wear…

There were demonstrations anyway. Angry Arab calls them riots. Here is the story from YaLibnan:

Druze religious leader Sheikh el Aql Naim Hassan condemned on Tuesday Wiam Wahab’s description of veiled Saudi women as “black trash bags, ” Future News reported
Future News also reported that Hassan, who is the highest Druze spiritual authority called President Michel Suleiman earlier in the day to condemn the comments made by Wahab, who is a Druze.
Wahab , a staunch ally of Syria and Hezbollah told OTV on Monday “Saudi women are black trash bags we see nothing of,” in reference to their attire. He also slammed outgoing Prime Minister Saad Hariri and Saudi Arabia.
In a related development angry protesters took to the streets and blocked North Lebanon’s international road in protest against Wahab’s comments on Saudi women.
Around 500 protesters gathered and chanted “There is no God but God” and “Wiam, you pig; you should be chained down.”
National News Agency (NNA) reported that the northern Abboudiyeh road that links Lebanon to Syria was blocked by burning tires.
The NNA added that security forces intervened to try and re-open the road.
Tripoli is Lebanon’s second-largest city and is considered the stronghold of the country’s Sunni Muslim community, which is the majority in Saudi Arabia. […]

Walid Jumblatt and Hezbollah also condemned the statement. “Black garbage bags” is probably too harsh a description. Burritos might be a more diplomatic comparison.

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon’s posterous


Leave a Comment » | Burka, Druze, garbage bags, Hezballah, Hezbollah, Hezbullah, Hizbullah, Lebanon, Michel Suleiman, Sa'ad Hariri, Sheikh el Aql Naim Hassan, Wiam Wahab | Permalink
Posted by Noah Simon


Religious Accommodations in Court Holding Cells, Islamic Headscarves, and Statutory Construction

March 16, 2011

A unanimous 11-member en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit has just reversed a decision, and held that the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act secures a limited right to religious accommodations in court holding cells, and not just in prisons and jails. (My former boss, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, dissented from that earlier decision; his conclusion has now carried the day before the en banc panel.) Here is an excerpt explaining the issue:

Recognizing the significance of religious freedom in all aspects of life, Congress passed the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (“RLUIPA” or “the Act”) to “protect[ ] institutionalized persons who are unable freely to attend to their religious needs and are therefore dependent on the government’s permission and accommodation for exercise of their religion.” Cutter v. Wilkinson, 544 U.S. 709, 721 (2005). RLUIPA prohibits state and local governments from imposing “a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person residing in or confined to an institution” unless the government demonstrates that imposing that burden “is the least restrictive means” of furthering “a compelling governmental interest.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1(a). The term “institution” includes “a jail, prison, or other correctional facility” and “a pretrial detention facility.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997(1)(B). We consider whether the Orange County Santa Ana Courthouse holding facility, where every day hundreds of individuals are detained in connection with court proceedings, is an “institution” as defined by RLUIPA. We conclude that this facility is such an “institution” under RLUIPA, and thus the Act covers persons detained at the facility.
Our interpretation of the statute is guided by three principles. To begin, the focus of our inquiry is narrow and preliminary. The only question before us is whether Orange County’s facility is an “institution” under RLUIPA; other courthouse or detention facilities have unique characteristics that warrant individualized review. Next, we are mindful that the issue of accommodation — whether the substantial burden on religious exercise is “the least restrictive means of furthering [a] compelling governmental interest” — is distinct from the threshold issue of whether the facility is a covered “institution” in the first place. 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1(a). The accommodation question involves serious practical considerations regarding institutional safety, security, and the feasibility of accommodation that are not before us now. Finally, Congress has explicitly directed us to resolve any ambiguities in RLUIPA “in favor of a broad protection of religious exercise, to the maximum extent permitted.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-3(g) (emphasis added).

Thanks to How Appealing for the pointer.

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon’s posterous

Leave a Comment » | Burka, Creeping Sharia | Permalink
Posted by Noah Simon