Bishop calls for burka ban: Pakistani-born Church of England cleric voices support for outlawing veil in public
• A senior bishop has called for a near-total ban on the wearing of burkas in public
• Michael Nazir-Ali, said they should be outlawed in a wide range of situations
• He said they should be banned where there were security and safety concerns
By JONATHAN PETRE FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY
PUBLISHED: 22:02, 11 August 2018 | UPDATED: 23:17, 11 August 2018

A senior Church of England bishop last night called for a near-total ban on the wearing of burkas in public.

The former Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, said burkas and niqabs should be outlawed in a wide range of situations where people interact, including in hospitals, GP surgeries, universities and schools.

The cleric said a ban should also extend to areas where there were legitimate security and safety concerns, such as at airports or while driving a car. However, he said it was acceptable for women to wear face veils at home, while in the street and at prayer.

The controversial call from the Pakistani-born bishop, who led the Diocese of Rochester between 1994 and 2009, drew support last night from Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury. Lord Carey said 'oppressive' veils should not become 'normalised.'

Their comments represent the most powerful intervention to date by senior clerics on the issue. They are likely to add to the fierce debate sparked last week when former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson wrote a newspaper article on why he opposed a ban on veils in public but compared women in burkas to 'letter boxes' and 'bank robbers.'

His comments have prompted an investigation by the Conservative Party.

Bishop Nazir-Ali told The Mail on Sunday: 'We have all seen how even male terrorists have escaped arrest by donning a burka and making an effective getaway.'

'For reasons of national security, there will be places like Parliament or Whitehall or town halls and council chambers where the burka should not be allowed.'

He said institutions including universities and schools were justified in wanting to know the identities of visitors or those who worked or studied there.

Staff at airports and courts also needed to see people's faces.

Perhaps more controversially, he added: 'Many professions require personal interaction with the client. In business, both the trader and the customer should be able to see one another's face and to interpret expressions if the transaction is to be mutually beneficial. This is even more true of doctors, dentists, nurses and paramedics.'

Warning of the threat posed by the wearing of veils, he said: ‘It is true that some women choose to wear the burka or niqab because they feel it makes them more observant Muslims…

‘It is also true, however, that the burka or niqab is being weaponised by Islamists to impose what they consider to be "Islamic" character on communities, neighbourhoods and even nations.

'In Britain, this has serious implications for the freedom of women, but it also has implications for integration and social cohesion. Where there is widespread use of the face veil, there will be greater isolation from one another and a sense of segregation will grow.'

Lord Carey, Archbishop of Canterbury between 1991 and 2002, said he 'strongly supported' the position taken by Bishop Nazir-Ali.

He said: 'We need to be able to identify people in government buildings, transport centres and tourist attractions, to take three examples. Security concerns trump cultural rights.'

But Sir Iqbal Sacranie, a former secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said he was 'sad' that such senior Church figures had failed to defend the basic rights of people to wear whatever they chose.

Lambeth Palace declined to comment last night.

l Read the full article by Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali at mailonsunday.co.uk/bishop.

Former Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali: Banning the Burqa

Boris Johnson likes being provocative. My own experience with him on the radio has been that he makes controversial comments to elicit controversial responses! This makes for good radio but it can offend this or that person or section of the population. We shouldn't be too alarmed by this because freedom of expression necessarily involves the possibility of giving offence, as long as there is no threat to the safety of an individual or community or of discrimination against them.

The furore, however, about his language regarding the appearance of those wearing the burqa or niqab, has meant that many have missed his extremely relaxed attitude to the actual wearing of these garments in public situations. The only restrictions he seems to countenance have to do with private preferences or rules in schools or offices.

Like him, I am not in favour of an absolute ban on the burqa but unlike him, I am in favour of a qualified ban on wearing the burqa or niqab in a wide range of situations. I am not for a total ban because that would violate the freedom of people to dress as they choose when they are at home, with friends or at their place of worship. There are many reasons, however, for restricting the wearing of these garments in a number of important areas of our common life.

I come myself from both a Muslim and Christian family background and have lived and worked in Muslim majority communities. I have had beloved aunts who, at first, wore the burqa and then abandoned it because it was incompatible with their work as schoolteachers. I have seen also how increasingly 'modest' dress, whether the burqa, on the frontier between Pakistan and Afghanistan, the niqab in Egypt or the chador in Iran, is being imposed on women in the name of religion, custom or culture. We cannot assume that such compulsion is not taking place in this country!

We have all seen how even male terrorists have escaped arrest by donning a burqa and making an effective getaway. For reasons of national security, there will be places like Parliament or Whitehall or town halls and council chambers where the burqa should not be allowed. Government and local authority buildings, as well as institutions like universities and schools, will want to know the identities of those who come to visit, work or study, not only at the point of entry but throughout the day. There needs to be legislative and regulatory backing for such bodies to be able to ban the burqa and the niqab on their premises.

Immigration and border control is another area where a ban is required. This is, of course, to determine the identity of those entering or leaving the country but it is also necessary to maintain adequate security in and around our ports and airports. Those responsible for our security need to able to tell, by people's behaviour in public places, including facial expressions, whether they are a danger to others. The courts have ruled already that a face veil must be removed at the time of testifying but this is not enough. Judge, jurors and counsel will also want to observe the facial expressions, of those involved in a trial, at other stages, when different people are testifying or when counsel for the defence or prosecution are arguing their case.

Many professions require personal interaction with the client. In business, both the trader and the customer should be able to see one another’s face and to interpret expressions, if the transaction is to be mutually beneficial. This is even more true of doctors, dentists, nurses and paramedics. They need to know, from facial expression, how a patient is feeling, if they are in pain and whether pain has been relieved through treatment. Those engaged in therapeutic counselling and in social work, similarly, have to be able to tell, by observing the face, the extent of a person’s distress or well being. Both Boris Johnson and Jack Straw have declared that they would refuse to see someone from their constituency if they were wearing a face veil because that would make a real conversation very difficult. Such a difficulty extends to those working in job and advice centres and in any number of community and family projects.

I have seen women driving in some countries with a niqab or other voluminous covering. How they do so safely is a mystery to me! Public safety on roads means that those wearing burqa, niqab or other full head covering, which obscures all-round vision, should not be allowed to operate vehicles where they pose a danger to the public. This must also be true of operating certain kinds of machinery at the workplace or of working in difficult terrain or challenging weather conditions. Again, the Police, The DVSA and employers will need legislative sanction if they are to enforce such bans.

It is true that some women choose to wear the burqa or niqab because they feel it makes them more observant Muslims although there doesn’t seem to be anything in the Qur’an or in Islamic law that requires this. It is also true, however, that the burqa or niqab is being weaponised by Islamists to impose what they consider to be 'Islamic' character on communities, neighbourhoods and even nations. Culture and custom can also be appealed to in persuading women to take the face veil. In Britain, this has serious implications for the freedom of women but it also has implications for integration and social cohesion. Where there is widespread use of the face veil, there will be greater isolation from one another and a sense of segregation will grow.

While Islamists have succeeded in introducing or re-introducing the veil in a number of countries, other countries, like Egypt, are resisting this trend. The highest Islamic authorities there have banned it in educational institutions and Parliament is considering legislation to ban it altogether. What is happening there has certainly influenced the European debate and we also need to learn from Egypt and other countries about the social and health consequences of observing strict purdah or the seclusion of women, including the wearing of face veils.

Boris Johnson claims that banning the burqa would result in a general crackdown on wearing any religious symbols in public. The Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson, has said, similarly, that banning the burqa is like banning Christians from wearing the crucifix. Neither of these claims bear examination. A crucifix, or similar religious symbol, does not conceal anyone's identity or expression nor can it be used to conceal a weapon which could be a danger to the public. When are we going to stop always seeking equivalences between Christianity and other religious beliefs? Christianity has given us our civilisation, our values and the dignity and freedom of the person. Let us celebrate that instead of always dragging it down to the lowest common denominator!

We need then both to uphold personal freedom and regulation for the sake of the public good. For weighty reasons of security, safety on our roads, control of our borders and professional conduct, the wearing of full-face veils can be and should be restricted in our society.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6050977/Pakistani-born-Church-England-cleric-voices-support-outlawing-veil-public.html

Waiting for those that will start rioting because of that

The only religion that is offended by everything but takes responsibility of nothing

princechurchill:
Waiting for those that will start rioting because of that

The only religion that is offended by everything but takes responsibility of nothing

Take responsibility for what,the OP's moronism?

This is no problem let the Muslims just term it fashion and watch as they accept the burkha.

tartar9:

Take responsibility for what,the OP's moronism?

Who is the slowpoke here? You, who lacks critical and refused to see 'reasons' why the slave garment (burka) should be banned worldwide, or the OP who only quoted a news report?

You need to abandon the mentality of the 7th century illiterate Arab-man (mohammed ibn abdullah) who scammed his fellow illiterates by claiming to receive divine revelation from an imaginary allahh. Why cover yourself with a slave sack, causing a social and security threat, in this 21st century?

Most Church of England members are rather delighted that these relics from the past are the ones talking about this. The former Bishop of Rochester Michael Nazir-Ali and former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey, are after all irrelevant and not talking for congregants of today who are far more tolerant of diversity.

Go hear what the more highly regarded Archbishop Sentamu of York, or the current Archbishop Welby of Canterbury, or even the former Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury would say. Now these are people really worth listening to, despite their occasional narrow views, instead of the bigoted former Bishop of Rochester Michael Nazir-Ali and the even more bigoted former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey.

Nazir Ali should stop behaving like a token spokesperson with his gross caricatures of reality just because he's from Pakistani, a fact he seems to think gives him license to be a bigoted prick. And Lord Carey should be in penitence and more mindful of the thousands of people abused under his watch!

true2god:
Who is the slowpoke here? You, who lacks critical and refused to see 'reasons' why the slave garment (burka) should be banned worldwide.

You do know these people were talking about burqa wearing in UK, right? Lots of burqa wearing women in UK would inform your rather ignorant self, it seems, that it is their choice to wear a burqa, so why do you wish to impose what you want on them? Next you'd be banning skirts and tops that don't hide girls underwear which is very popular amongst girls in UK too if we give you an ounce of a chance!

Imposing wear on anyone is the 'slavery', and a ban, of what you call "slave garment" is just such an imposition! That phrase "slave garment" applies in Nigeria maybe, but in UK, where the government would take your children away from you just because "my mummy shouted at me", it's more of a choice to be a slave, at best.

budaatum:

You do know these people were talking about burqa wearing in UK, right? Lots of burqa wearing women in UK would inform your rather ignorant self, it seems, that it is their choice to wear a burqa, so why do you wish to impose what you want on them? Next you'd be banning skirts and tops that don't hide girls underwear which is very popular amongst girls in UK too if we give you an ounce of a chance!

Imposing wear on anyone is the 'slavery', and a ban, of what you call "slave garment" is just such an imposition! That phrase "slave garment" applies in Nigeria maybe, but in UK, where the government would take your children away from you just because "my mummy shouted at me", it's more of a choice to be a slave, at best.

Bros you don't make a single sense in your post. In a normal society, you don't allow a woman who you can't see her face to enter a bank, hotel, a law court or a school environment. God created face for several reasons part of which are for communication and identification. When you cover your face will Islamic-arab veil, in the public, you have systematically segregated yourself from the mainstream society and also pose a security risk to others.

Recently, here in Nigeria, a 17-year old hardened assassin did carry out her evil act fully dressed in Islamic veil, she was unfortunately a Muslim as well. All female boko-haram suicide bomber carry out their act fully veiled. I wonder why you are blind to these facts.

In as much as it is an Arab religious and cultural things for their women to be veiled, they must understand that they need to adjust socially and culturally since they have chosen to leave, en mass, their Islamic countries to the western world. You can't run away from an oppressive society to a free society, only to come and destroy the free society that provided you good life and secure your future. Unfortunately, this is what Islam is notorious for.

true2god:
Bros you don't make a single sense in your post.

"To you", you forgot to add! And that's perfectly ok.

For your information, in UK, you can't cover your face with a helmet, hoodie, not to talk of a burqa, and enter a bank, court or teach in a school environment, so I don't quite get the problem. If I put on my burqa, I already know I will face some restrictions, but how you imagine that I, who puts on a restricting burqa, minds certain restrictions, confounds me. Does "burqa equal stupid", to you maybe? Oh, I get it, "burqa equals security risk" after all, one person had a bomb under their's so we all must do, right? By your logic, black people in UK should bleach themselves white too, after all, one black person mugged someone yesterday! Or perhaps all black people should be thrown in jail or be kicked out the country? Thankfully, UK seems much more enlightened and less oppressive than you and that rather ignorant former Nazir Ali are and don't think one bad apple spoils the whole bunch.

When I ran from an oppressive country to the Western world, can you understand that my desire might have been that I ran so that I could stop being oppressed? If you do, then please stop oppressing me by imposing on me what I should or shouldn't wear because of your fear of Islam!

budaatum:

"To you", you forgot to add! And that's perfectly ok.

For your information, in UK, you can't cover your face with a helmet, hoodie, not to talk of a burqa, and enter a bank, court or teach in a school environment, so I don't quite get the problem. If I put on my burqa, I already know I will face some restrictions, but how you imagine that I, who puts on a restricting burqa, minds certain restrictions, confounds me. Does "burqa equal stupid", to you maybe? Oh, I get it, "burqa equals security risk" after all, one person had a bomb under their's so we all must do, right? By your logic, black people in UK should bleach themselves white too, after all, one black person mugged someone yesterday! Or perhaps all black people should be thrown in jail or be kicked out the country? Thankfully, UK seems much more enlightened and less oppressive than you and that rather ignorant former Nazir Ali are and don't think one bad apple spoils the whole bunch.

When I ran from an oppressive country to the Western world, can you understand that my desire might have been that I ran so that I could stop being oppressed? If you do, then please stop oppressing me by imposing on me what I should or shouldn't wear because of your fear of Islam!

If all women should cover their faces , how would you know who is who? How would you identify your own wife outside your home?

How would you identify a culprit?

A criminal can easily hide under a veil to perpetrate evils , don't you think so ?

A face is not a private part . Your head is your identity.

true2god:
Unfortunately, this is what Islam is notorious for.

Islam is not asking anyone in UK to wear a burqa, like you imply here. The battle is for the individual's right to wear whatever pleases them. And I would present this same argument if you had wanted to ban me from walking down the streets in my bra and knickers, which is not against the law, per se, in UK. Though I know I'd better not go near a school, or in a bank or a court in just those!

enilove:


If all women should cover their faces , how would you know who is who? How would you identify your own wife outside your home?

How would you identify a culprit?

A criminal can easily hide under a veil to perpetrate evils , don't you think so ?

A face is not a private part . Your head is your identity.

Oh, my dear! You, my wife, and I, are so close that I can identify you just by your sweet smell! I sure as hell can tell you by your words, so don't you worry about that. Besides, if I were to make a mistake and go up to another woman just because you chose to wear a burqa, it's not as if I'm stupid enough to blame her burqa for my sleeping with her! I hopefully respect you more than to think that would wash by you.

Technology is sufficiently advanced in UK that we can identify a criminal who wears a mask and a hood, which most do, so we can identify and tell who you are in a burqa! Besides, people wearing burqas don't go about committing crimes. They already stand out so hardly have the opportunity to commit any crimes.

budaatum:

By your logic, black people in UK should bleach themselves white too, after all, one black person mugged someone yesterday! Or perhaps all black people should be thrown in jail or be kicked out the country? Thankfully, UK seems much more enlightened and less oppressive than you and that rather ignorant former Nazir Ali are and don't think one bad apple spoils the whole bunch.

When I ran from an oppressive country to the Western world, can you understand that my desire might have been that I ran so that I could stop being oppressed? If you do, then please stop oppressing me by imposing on me what I should or shouldn't wear because of your fear of Islam!

This is the issue with modern Islam: when an issue is raised on certain practice or lifestyle of Muslims, the response from Muslims is usually to invoke racial problems to defend their argument. So weird and crazy! Islam is not a race but a belief system, why bring in racial prejudice into a discussion that has to do with Islamic dressings deemed a security risk?

If burka is not an issues countries like Austria, Germany, Denmark, France, etc will not ban it. For the fact that UK has not banned it does not mean that they won't ban it in future. The debate has already begun.

If a country like Germany, that have given Muslims houses and free money (which Saudi Arabia can never give to non-Muslims) but asked Muslims not to wear cloths that will hide their identity, how is that oppression? How is it oppressive for me to ask you to obey laws passed for security reasons, like banning burka and niqab? Your thinking is seriously flawed.

true2god:
This is the issue with modern Islam: when an issue is raised on certain practice or lifestyle of Muslims, the response from Muslims is usually to invoke racial problems to defend their argument. So weird and crazy! Islam is not a race but a belief system, why bring in racial prejudice into a discussion that has to do with Islamic dressings deemed a security risk?

If burka is not an issues countries like Austria, Germany, Denmark, France, etc will not ban it. For the fact that UK has not banned it does not mean that they won't ban it in future. The debate has already begun.

If a country like Germany, that have given Muslims houses and free money (which Saudi Arabia can never give to non-Muslims) but asked Muslims not to wear cloths that will hide their identity, how is that oppression? How is it oppressive for me to ask you to obey laws passed for security reasons, like banning burka and niqab? Your thinking is seriously flawed.

You don't get it do you? Nazir Ali was speaking in liberal UK that hasn't passed such stupid laws, and not in or about Austria, Germany, Denmark, France, countries that seem more dictatorial and fascist than UK. Imagine French people deciding the law allows them to strip a woman of her burqini on a beach! Does that not sound barbaric to you? And, we don't live by Saudi Arabian laws in UK, nor does what they do dictate to us what we should do! We, for instance are on our second female Prime Minister while they only just gave a steering wheel to women!

UK, and most of Europe, has been there before, banning cultural and religious practise willy nilly, and have seen where they got them. Or are we not talking about the Europe that persecuted people for being Catholic, prosecuted people for being Protestants, prosecuted people for being Jewish, black, not blue eyed and blond haired, born out of wedlock, gay, ginger, Irish, disabled, homosexual, female, and so on and so on? Only those who forget history would return to the bigotry of the past. And even if the majority forget, those with brains will remind them!

If I allow those in authority to pass laws that are against things I dislike today, one day those same laws would be used against me too. Would that be the time I say I don't like those laws?

budaatum:

Oh, my dear! You, my wife, and I, are so close that I can identify you just by your sweet smell! I sure as hell can tell you by your words, so don't you worry about that. Besides, if I were to make a mistake and go up to another woman just because you chose to wear a burqa, it's not as if I'm stupid enough to blame her burqa for my sleeping with her! I hopefully respect you more than to think that would wash by you.

Technology is sufficiently advanced in UK that we can identify a criminal who wears a mask and a hood, which most do, so we can identify and tell who you are in a burqa! Besides, people wearing burqas don't go about committing crimes. They already stand out so hardly have the opportunity to commit any crimes.

Are you a dog that can perceive a woman's smell from two meters away?

I have a wife and we have been together for more than 25 years , so I know it is impossible to identify a human being by smell.

So, think rightly and say something logical.

Where there are hundreds of women passing by ,you will go around sniffing them one by one to identify your wife ?

enilove:


Are you a dog that can perceive a woman's smell from two meters away?

I have a wife and we have been together for more than 25 years , so I know it is impossible to identify a human being by smell.

So, think rightly and say something logical.

Where there are hundreds of women passing by ,you will go around sniffing them one by one to identify your wife ?

Call me whatever you want. The fact is that your smell is so strong that I can tell it's you enilove, just by reading what you write, and if I were married to you, I'd know you even more and would be better able to tell you apart from other burqa wearing people by it! You have a distinct way about you that cannot be missed even if you hide it under a burqa.

As to saying something logical, do you think that if a hundred burqa woman were walking by me that my wife would be waiting for me to smell her before she leaves those hundred women and comes up to me and says "darling"? You must think I'm one of those rotten husbands who's wife has to hide from and who wouldn't buy her a distinct nice smelly perfume so I can smell her distinct sweet smelling aroma a mile off!

Because you can't smell your's don't mean my nose don't work or is as bad as your's!

budaatum:

You don't get it do you? Nazir Ali was speaking in liberal UK that hasn't passed such stupid laws, and not in or about Austria, Germany, Denmark, France, countries that seem more dictatorial and fascist than UK. Imagine French people deciding the law allows them to strip a woman of her burqini on a beach! Does that not sound barbaric to you? And, we don't live by Saudi Arabian laws in UK, nor does what they do dictate to us what we should do! We, for instance are on our second female Prime Minister while they only just gave a steering wheel to women!

UK, and most of Europe, has been there before, banning cultural and religious practise willy nilly, and have seen where they got them. Or are we not talking about the Europe that persecuted people for being Catholic, prosecuted people for being Protestants, prosecuted people for being Jewish, black, not blue eyed and blond haired, born out of wedlock, gay, ginger, Irish, disabled, homosexual, female, and so on and so on? Only those who forget history would return to the bigotry of the past. And even if the majority forget, those with brains will remind them!

If I allow those in authority to pass laws that are against things I dislike today, one day those same laws would be used against me too. Would that be the time I say I don't like those laws?

If Germany, Austria, France, Denmark, etc, are dictatorial, why are millions of Muslims rushing to leave their homeland to migrate to those countries? Why do Muslims see more opportunities and better life in Germany, France, Denmark, etc, instead of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, etc. As a normal person, you adapt to local laws and not local laws adapt to your religion and beliefs. The real dictators are the Muslim/Arab leaders who are destroying their countries hence causing mass migration into the land of the 'kafirs'.

As a typical Muslim, you always attempt to justify your failures by pointing out the weaknesses in others, specially your arch-enemy, Christianity. This is not how life is meant to be. You take responsibility for your failures or success. Muslims pointing out past events in the Christendom to justify their present irrational and barbaric practices is ridiculous and makes no sense.

And remember, the countries I listed are some of the most liberal nations on earth, for the fact that they don't want Islamic burka, for their own safety, does not make them dictatorial. These countries are far better than all Muslim nations in terms of human right, religious and minority rights.

They wear Buka when they want to murder Souls.

It's not a BornAgain civilisation, so do not be equally yoked with anyone wearing Buka. U.N must be ready to ban it to make Sins more open to detect.

That could be Devil in Disguise.

I repeat, UK does not have any any laws whatsoever against the wearing of a burqa! UK relies on burqa wearing people to understand for themself, and despite their religion, that perhaps out of regard for the nation you are in, that you would not wear one when going into a bank, or to court or near a school (unless you have come to pick up your child, in which case we know you are a burqa wearing mother and would put in place means of recognising that it is you, like your child recognising you, which we shall monitor!)

That's what you get in a rational minded, reason reliant nation! We just don't have any evidence that 'burqa wearing' means 'crime committer', since we have no evidence to support that claim.

true2god:
If Germany, Austria, France, Denmark, etc, are dictatorial, why are millions of Muslims rushing to leave their homeland to migrate to those countries? Why do Muslims see more opportunities and better life in Germany, France, Denmark, etc, instead of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, etc. As a normal person, you adapt to local laws and not local laws adapt to your religion and beliefs. The real dictators are the Muslim/Arab leaders who are destroying their countries hence causing mass migration into the land of the 'kafirs'.

As a typical Muslim, you always attempt to justify your failures by pointing out the weaknesses in others, specially your arch-enemy, Christianity. This is not how life is meant to be. You take responsibility for your failures or success. Muslims pointing out past events in the Christendom to justify their present irrational and barbaric practices is ridiculous and makes no sense.

And remember, the countries I listed are some of the most liberal nations on earth, for the fact that they don't want Islamic burka, for their own safety, does not make them dictatorial. These countries are far better than all Muslim nations in terms of human right, religious and minority rights.

Although I'm a Muslim but not so religeous, I don't like all these Pakistani, Afghanistan and Middle Eastern Muslims, they use Islam as an excuse to commit all kinds of atrocities, they practice animal cruelty on dogs, they like trouble too much, they make a big deal out of everything.
Why can't they just relax and enjoy life? All they want to do is to fight and kill, me I can not go and be fighting and killing because of religeon.

These people are a nuisance, plane and simple.

budaatum:
I repeat, UK does not have any any laws whatsoever against the wearing of a burqa! UK relies on burqa wearing people to understand for themself, and despite their religion, that perhaps out of regard for the nation you are in, that you would not wear one when going into a bank, or to court or near a school (unless you have come to pick up your child, in which case we know you are a burqa wearing mother and would put in place means of recognising that it is you, like your child recognising you, which we shall monitor!)

That's what you get in a rational minded, reason reliant nation! We just don't have any evidence that 'burqa wearing' means 'crime committer', since we have no evidence to support that claim.

Britain has suddenly become a rational-minded, reason-reliant nation because the have not also banned the burka. Wow, that's great!

If I get you right, Germany, Denmark and the rest are not 'rational-minded' people because they love their people more that they love pandering to Muslims' weak sensibility. Yes, the Germans are not rationally minded for allowing over 1million Muslim migrants into their country, provided them houses, food and money (which Saudi Arabia will never do even for their fellow Muslim). If the Germans are rational, they will never allow a hostile religion like Islam to invade their country with millions of Muslim migrants.

The same British people you are praising for being tolerant today will dump you as soon as their oil interest in the Arabian world ends.

true2god:
Britain has suddenly become a rational-minded, reason-reliant nation because the have not also banned the burka. Wow, that's great!

If I get you right, Germany, Denmark and the rest are not 'rational-minded' people because they love their people more that they love pandering to Muslims' weak sensibility. Yes, the Germans are not rationally minded for allowing over 1million Muslim migrants into their country, provided them houses, food and money (which Saudi Arabia will never do even for their fellow Muslim). If the Germans are rational, they will never allow a hostile religion like Islam to invade their country with millions of Muslim migrants.

The same British people you are praising for being tolerant today will dump you as soon as their oil interest in the Arabian world ends.

simple issue.

you can't force anyone to wear a burqa.

you also can't force anyone to remove their burqa.

wearing of burqa is completely an issue of CHOICE. people should have personal liberty.

Gggg102:


simple issue.

you can't force anyone to wear a burqa.

you also can't force anyone to remove their burqa.

wearing of burqa is completely an issue of CHOICE. people should have personal liberty.

The state has the right to take any action to protect the lives and properties of her citizens, including banning the burka, if there are potential security risk identified. This is called commonsense.

true2god:
Britain has suddenly become a rational-minded, reason-reliant nation because the have not also banned the burka. Wow, that's great!

If I get you right, Germany, Denmark and the rest are not 'rational-minded' people because they love their people more that they love pandering to Muslims' weak sensibility. Yes, the Germans are not rationally minded for allowing over 1million Muslim migrants into their country, provided them houses, food and money (which Saudi Arabia will never do even for their fellow Muslim). If the Germans are rational, they will never allow a hostile religion like Islam to invade their country with millions of Muslim migrants.

The same British people you are praising for being tolerant today will dump you as soon as their oil interest in the Arabian world ends.

You are the one who is not rationally minded actually. Where did you get Germany banned the burqa from?

The German parliament has supported a draft law banning women working in the civil service, judiciary and military from wearing full-face Islamic veils.
Burqas and niqabs will be prohibited in selected professions as part of the legislation

I do wonder why you have to lie to promote your ideology. Germany has history and can't possibly pass such a stupid law since it would resemble how they began the extermination of the Jews!

Go learn about the European countries (Austria, France, Denmark) that do have such bans and learn too about fascism, and then you might just understand why some are against it.

budaatum:

You are the one who is not rationally minded actually. Where did you get Germany banned the burqa from?

The German parliament has supported a draft law banning women working in the civil service, judiciary and military from wearing full-face Islamic veils.
Burqas and niqabs will be prohibited in selected professions as part of the legislation

I do wonder why you have to lie to promote your ideology. Germany has history and can't possibly pass such a stupid law since it would resemble how they began the extermination of the Jews!

Go learn about the European countries (Austria, France, Denmark) that do have such bans and learn too about fascism, and then you might just understand why some are against it.

Typical Islamic wrapped thinking without commonsense! So German partial ban of burka has suddenly made me a liar and all other rational argument null and void. Can you 'see' that your IQ level is very low? So Germany is no longer a fascist state (because they partially banned burka) but all the countries that had a full ban in place are fascist?

Maybe you choose to use the word 'fascist' (just like racist) because you are very very familiar with it on the news without even trying to understand the meaning of the word 'fascism' and how the movement started. Opposing an evil ideology (Islam) and its subsidiary lifestyle (its fashions or laws) is not fascism but commonsense.

In the Arab/Muslim world (where fascism and oppression is 100% in practise), issues are not even debated. Laws will be made and if you don't like the law you migrate (hijra) but if you choose to stay and fight against the law you will be killed. This is how Muslim societies operate and this is why Muslims are running away from their own countries out of fear.

true2god:
Typical Islamic wrapped thinking without commonsense! So German partial ban of burka has suddenly made me a liar and all other rational argument null and void. Can you 'see' that your IQ level is very low? So Germany is no longer a fascist state (because they partially banned burka) but all the countries that had a full ban in place are fascist?

Maybe you choose to use the word 'fascist' (just like racist) because you are very very familiar with it on the news without even trying to understand the meaning of the word 'fascism' and how the movement started. Opposing an evil ideology (Islam) and its subsidiary lifestyle (its fashions or laws) is not fascism but commonsense.

In the Arab/Muslim world (where fascism and oppression is 100% in practise), issues are not even debated. Laws will be made and if you don't like the law you migrate (hijra) but if you choose to stay and fight against the law you will be killed. This is how Muslim societies operate and this is why Muslims are running away from their own countries out of fear.

Germany is actually not as fascist as Austria, as you'd know if you read the news. Germany has a very embarrassing history that makes them ensure they are not so fascist anymore. It's why they have allowed so many Muslims in, to help wipe out their fascist historical past.

UK has in modern time been liberal. UK in the past, persecuted Protestants, locking them up and all, and at other times, did the same to Catholics, so they learnt their lesson and would not go persecuting others just because of their religions these days. UK even has laws, the Equality Act 2010, to be specific, which makes it illegal to discriminate against anyone because of their age, being or becoming a transsexual person, being married or in a civil partnership, being pregnant or on maternity leave disability, race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin, religion, belief or lack of religion/belief, sex, sexual orientation.

Go read British news today. Two huge items relating to religion gave been trending for weeks. One is the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, being hounded for being anti-semitic. The other is former Foreign Secretary, Conservative Party's Boris Johnson, being hounded for being against Islam.

You go on with your hatred and anti-religious rhetorical lies, and the favouring of one over the other. I get to live in harmony with you all since you aren't exactly as evil as you are making out or shoving it down my throat!

budaatum:

Germany is actually not as fascist as Austria, as you'd know if you read the news. Germany has a very embarrassing history that makes them ensure they are not so fascist anymore. It's why they have allowed so many Muslims in, to help wipe out their fascist historical past.

UK has in modern time been liberal. UK in the past, persecuted Protestants, locking them up and all, and at other times, did the same to Catholics, so they learnt their lesson and would not go persecuting others just because of their religions these days. UK even has laws, the Equality Act 2010, to be specific, which makes it illegal to discriminate against anyone because of their age, being or becoming a transsexual person, being married or in a civil partnership, being pregnant or on maternity leave disability, race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin, religion, belief or lack of religion/belief, sex, sexual orientation.

Go read British news today. Two huge items relating to religion gave been trending for weeks. One is the leader of the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, being hounded for being anti-semitic. The other is former Foreign Secretary, Conservative Party's Boris Johnson, being hounded for being against Islam.

You go on with your hatred and anti-religious rhetorical lies, and the favouring of one over the other. I get to live in harmony with you all since you aren't exactly as evil as you are making out or shoving it down my throat!

You are a Muslim hypocrite. Is there equality between the ummah and the 'kafir' in Islamic countries? Mention a single Arab-muslim nation where a kafir is equal to Muslim, both in human and religious right. It is ok for Muslims to praise non-muslim countries for protecting Muslims and Islam but will keep quiet while all Muslim countries oppress religious minorities.

You are not well informed about the old relationship between Austria and Germany. Both countries are one before being balkanized after the WW2 defeat. Both countries are culturally and ethnically homogenous. So be informed.

If you call my writings 'antireligious' rhetorics then you have to condemn your Quran and your hadith that promote the eternal hatred for the Jews and the Christians (Qur'an 5:51, 9:28-30, 98:6. sahih Bukhari 4:52:196).

True2god, you know nothing about buda, and your assumptions about buda make you argue against some imaginary buda you've made up in your head! It kind of makes what you say about buda meaningless to buda in particular, despite buda's understanding of your hatred for Islam.

So, let me inform you a little bit. First, buda would inform you that gods, all of them, are figments of your imagination, things you cook up in your heads and claim exist with absolutely no regard to the evidence. buda does not mind this imaginary creation of gods in people's heads, except that the imaginary cooking up of things in your heads transfers from gods to the entire universe at times as you yourself show by cooking up imaginary atrocities that Muslims have done to you and in UK, and the Muslim hypocrite buda you seem to see before you.

The fact that some countries behave badly does not mean UK, a nation that sees itself as far above the rest, should stoop so low to ignorant nation's levels. UK is a country with Christian values in it's dna. It is not a nation quick to anger, does not disregard evidence and make up silly rhetoric and call it true, remembers history - including what it as a nation has done to others, though quick to forget bad done to it; and UK is most mindful and vigilant of repeating the mistakes of the past, and God, saves the Queen and our most illustrious nation because of all that!

I am not joining you in some argument about who has the biggest god as it would be rather silly arguing which is the biggest amongst two imaginary entities. But one thing I know is that Christianity, which I assume to be your preferred sort of god, does not exactly advocate an eye for an eye as you claim. And the fact that Muslims admire your countries should be a reason to rejoice, since they have seen the good you seem to offer and want some of it. In no time now, they might take it back to their countries and eventually join you in singing Jesus is Lord, so long as you continue to ensure your behaviour is better than their's and don't get frustrated and become like them instead!

true2god:
You are a Muslim hypocrite. Is there equality between the ummah and the 'kafir' in Islamic countries? Mention a single Arab-muslim nation where a kafir is equal to Muslim, both in human and religious right. It is ok for Muslims to praise non-muslim countries for protecting Muslims and Islam but will keep quiet while all Muslim countries oppress religious minorities.

You are not well informed about the old relationship between Austria and Germany. Both countries are one before being balkanized after the WW2 defeat. Both countries are culturally and ethnically homogenous. So be informed.

If you call my writings 'antireligious' rhetorics then you have to condemn your Quran and your hadith that promote the eternal hatred for the Jews and the Christians (Qur'an 5:51, 9:28-30, 98:6. sahih Bukhari 4:52:196).

true2god:
The state has the right to take any action to protect the lives and properties of her citizens, including banning the burka, if there are potential security risk identified. This is called commonsense.

P.s. in UK there is nothing like a "State". There are the people though, who elect representatives to Parliament who rule on the people's behalf.

It would be very interesting if UK get to debate a burqa ban in Parliament to be honest. But to, initially propose a burqa ban in UK, a party would have to state it in their manifesto at elections, and win that election.

We had a party who did by the way, and in the last councillor elections, they lost 123 seats, and retained a paltry 3. And at the last parliamentary elections, UKIP lost the single seat they held out of the available 650.

And a ruling party needs 'half of the 650 available seats plus one" to form a government. And without it, can't propose a single bill in parliament!

Hope that indicates how little appetite UK has for such nonsense as a burqa ban!