A culture moves to protect itself. Any objections?

[Mornac]

• Tweet

Spain's Senate Votes to Ban Burqa

By RAPHAEL MINDER

MADRID — In a significant escalation of Spain’s debate over how to handle radical Islam, the Senate on Wednesday narrowly and unexpectedly approved a motion to ban Muslim women from wearing in public the burqa or other garments that cover the whole body.

The vote, 131 to 129, was another setback for the Socialist government of Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, which had favored more-limited restrictions on Islamic clothing and has instead been pushing to curtail religious fundamentalism through better education.
 
The Spanish vote comes amid several national initiatives across Europe to restrict the spread of radical Islam and defend liberal values.

In Belgium, the lower house of Parliament has already approved a measure that, if unamended by the upper house, would make it a crime to wear in public “clothing that hides the face.”

France, which has the largest Muslim population in Europe, has also been inching toward such a ban on the burqa. The measure has the backing of President Nicolas Sarkozy, who recently condemned the garment as “a sign of subservience” rather than one of religion.

In Switzerland last year, a referendum banned the construction of minarets.

While national politicians may be urging a clampdown on the burqa, such moves are still expected to run into legal obstacles. In March, France’s top administrative body, the Council of State, warned the government that a full ban would be unconstitutional. A commission of the Council of Europe, the European institution dealing with human rights issues, also recently warned governments against imposing a complete ban that would violate women’s individual rights.

Before the Spanish Senate’s vote, some of the country’s local authorities had already moved to introduce restrictions on the burqa. The issue was especially heated in the region of Catalonia, where the debate over Islam and immigration has become entangled in early campaigning ahead of regional elections later this year. The pending elections may have proved crucial in the Wednesday vote, as senators from the CiU, a Catalan party, surprisingly switched their earlier stance to vote in favor of a burqa ban.

The motion adopted by the senators calls on Spain to outlaw “any usage, custom or discriminatory practice that limits the freedom of women.” It was drafted and led by politicians from the main center-right opposition People's Party.

Justifying the vote, one of the senators from the CiU, Montserrat Candini, said that “we cannot tolerate that nobody understands that we are not in favor of banning the burqa.”

The Senate’s position also came as a surprise because although Spain has become a major European entry point for Muslim migrants from North Africa, few of those immigrants wear either the burqa or the niqab, which does not cover the eyes. A similar argument has also been made by opponents of a burqa ban in countries like France, where only an estimated 2,000 women wear the burqa out of a Muslim population of about 5 million. France, however, already passed a law in 2004 to ban head scarves or any other “conspicuous” religious symbol from state schools in order to preserve their secularism.

The Spanish government is supposed to follow the Senate’s motion. However, given that Socialist senators opposed the ban, the governing party is likely to seek ways to circumvent the vote.

Anna Terrón, the secretary of state for immigration, said the Senate vote had “more to do with the election campaign in which the CiU is involved than with a real discussion” on the burqa.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/24/world/europe/24iht-spain.html

[Mornac]

Very encouraging to see no one objecting to this stuff! Here's another:


French parliament approves ban on face veils

By ANGELA DOLAND
Associated Press Writer

Tue Jul 13, 1:23 pm ET
 
PARIS – France's lower house of parliament overwhelmingly approved a ban on wearing burqa-style Islamic veils Tuesday, part of a concerted effort to define and protect French values that has disconcerted many in the country's large Muslim community.

Proponents of the law say face-covering veils don't square with the French ideal of women's equality or its secular tradition. The bill is controversial abroad but popular in France, where its relatively few outspoken critics say conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy has resorted to xenophobia to attract far-right voters.

The ban on burqas and niqabs will go in September to the Senate, where it also is likely to pass. Its biggest hurdle will likely come after that, when France's constitutional watchdog scrutinizes it. Some legal scholars say there is a chance it could be deemed unconstitutional.

Spain and Belgium have similar bans in the works. In France, which has Europe's largest Muslim population, about 5 million of the country's 64 million people are believed to be Muslim. While ordinary headscarves are common in France, only about 1,900 women are believed to wear face-covering veils.

The main body representing French Muslims says such garb is not suitable in France, but it worries that the ban will stigmatize all Muslims.

In Tuesday's vote at the National Assembly, there were 335 votes for the bill and just one against it. Most members of the main opposition group, the Socialist Party, walked out and refused to vote, though they in fact support a ban. They simply have differences over where it should be enforced, underscoring the lack of controversy among French politicians on the issue.

The bill passed Tuesday bans face-covering veils everywhere that can be considered public space, even in the street, but the Socialists only want it in certain places, such as government buildings, hospitals and public transport.

France's government has sought to insist that assimilation is the only path for immigrants and minorities, and last year it launched a grand nationwide debate on what it means to be French. The country has had difficulty integrating generations of immigrants and their children, as witnessed by weeks of rioting by youths, many of them minorities, in troubled neighborhoods in 2005.

At the National Assembly, few dissenters spoke out about civil liberties or fears of fanning anti-Islam sentiment. Before the vote, Greens lawmaker Francois de Rugy said the conservatives "are throwing oil on the fire — you are reviving tensions just to win votes."

Legislator Berengere Poletti, of Sarkozy's party, said face-covering veils "are a prison for women, they are the sign of their submission to their husbands, brothers or fathers."

The niqab and burqa are also seen here as a gateway to extremism and an attack on secularism, a central value of France for more than a century.

Discussions in France have dragged on for more than a year, since Sarkozy declared in June 2009 that the burqa is "not welcome" in France.

There has been some concern the bill could prod terror groups to eye France or its citizens as potential targets. Following Sarkozy's comments, al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb issued a statement on Web sites vowing to "seek vengeance against France."

The legislation would forbid face-covering Muslim veils in all public places in France and calls for euro150 ($185) fines or citizenship classes, or both.

The bill also is aimed at husbands and fathers — anyone convicted of forcing someone else to wear the garb risks a year of prison and a euro30,000 ($38,000) fine, with both penalties doubled if the victim is a minor.

Officials have taken pains to craft language that does not single out Muslims. While the proposed legislation is colloquially referred to as the "anti-burqa law," it is officially called "the bill to forbid concealing one's face in public."

It refers neither to Islam nor to veils. Officials insist the law against face-covering is not discriminatory because it would apply to everyone, not just Muslims. Yet they cite a host of exceptions, including motorcycle helmets, or masks for health reasons, fencing, skiing or carnivals.

In March, France's highest administrative body, the Council of State, warned that the law could be found unconstitutional. It said that neither French secularism nor concerns about women's equality, human dignity or public security could be legal justifications.

Anticipating a ban on the veils, an entrepreneur who tried to run for president in 2007, Rachid Nekkaz, is creating a fund to pay the fines of anyone caught wearing a niqab or burqa.

While he says he opposes the full veils, he says a ban would be anti-democratic, and he is creating the fund "so that my country is not the disgrace of the whole world."

In Cairo, Islamic scholar Abdelmotie Bayoumi said a French ban would not violate Islamic law, but would violate personal freedoms.

"The niqab has no strong legitimacy based on Quran or in examples from the Prophet's life that makes it a religious imposition on women. A Muslim woman wears the niqab not because of religious duty, but as a personal freedom," said Bayoumi, whose books include "Contemporary Testimonies," about the full-face veil.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100713/ap_on_re_eu/eu_france_forbidding_the_veil_9

[IM2]

What the hell is that culture protecting itself from? You see dumb fuck a culture includes all people within it. You do not suppress our try elimninating any group within that culture and claim to tbe protecting your culture. What you are doing is excluding, not protecting.

[johnhp]

IM

Look at the ideology behind the post, as expressed by the subject line.  The law will impact directly 1,900 out of a Muslim population of 5 million.  This is far less than a percent of the Muslim population.  To Melnac, the clothing of a fifth of a minority population constitutes a threat to culture.  But it is even more absurd.  The population of France is about 65 million more or less.  How absurd is it to suggest that 1,900 women are a threat to the culture in a society of 65 million?  That is how out of touch Melnac has become.

[IM2]

The moron never was in touch.

[Mornac]

16 October 2010
Merkel says German multicultural society has failedGerman Chancellor Angela Merkel: "lmmigrants should learn to speak German"

Attempts to build a multicultural society in Germany have "utterly failed", Chancellor Angela Merkel says.

In a speech in Potsdam, she said the so-called "multikulti" concept - where people would "live side-by-side" happily - did not work.

Mrs Merkel's comments come amid recent outpourings of strong anti-immigrant feeling from mainstream politicians.

A recent survey showed that more than 30% of Germans believed Germany was "overrun by foreigners".

Continue reading the main story Related storiesGermans break silence over immigrationRace-row German banker quitsGermany marks 20 years of unity
The study - by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation think-tank - also showed that roughly the same number thought that some 16 million of Germany's immigrants or people with foreign origins had come to the country for the social benefits.

Foreign workers
 
Mrs Merkel told a gathering of younger members of her conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party on Saturday that at "the beginning of the 60s our country called the foreign workers to come to Germany and now they live in our country... We kidded ourselves a while, we said: 'They won't stay, sometime they will be gone', but this isn't reality.

"And of course, the approach [to build] a multicultural [society] and to live side-by-side and to enjoy each other... has failed, utterly failed."

In her speech, the chancellor specifically referred to recent comments by German President Christian Wulff who said that Islam was "part of Germany" like Christianity and Judaism.

 Mrs Merkel says Islam is part of Germany but more must be done on integration
While acknowledging that this was the case, Mrs Merkel stressed that immigrants living in Germany needed to do more to integrate, including learning to speak German.

"Anyone who does not immediately speak German", she said, "is not welcome".

By speaking now, Mrs Merkel has now joined the increasingly hot debate on multiculturalism, coming down on the side of those who are uneasy about immigration, says the BBC's correspondent in Berlin, Stephen Evans.

Her comments come a week after she held talks with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in which the two leaders pledged to do more to improve the often poor integration record of Germany's estimated 2.5 million-strong Turkish community.

Earlier this week, Horst Seehofer, the leader of the CDU's Bavarian sister party, CSU, said about integration that it was "obvious that immigrants from different cultures like Turkey and Arab countries, all in all, find it harder".

"'Multikulti' is dead," Mr Seehofer said.

In August, Thilo Sarrazin, a senior official at Germany's central bank, said that "no immigrant group other than Muslims is so strongly connected with claims on the welfare state and crime". Mr Sarrazin has since resigned.

Such recent strong anti-immigrant feelings from mainstream politicians come amid an anger in Germany about high unemployment, even if the economy is growing faster than those of its rivals, our correspondent says.

He adds that there also seems to be a new strident tone in the country, perhaps leading to less reticence about no-go-areas of the past.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11559451

[johnhp]

I read some of your insane ramblings to my jack o lantern Mornac.  Want to see what you did?





i hope you are proud of yourself.  He is in surgery now.  He may never recover.  Course it could be worse.  His brother was DOA.





But they did call the authorities and they will be coming for you looking for answers....

[flyboy]

Hey mornac why don't you just say you dont like foreigners and save yourself alot of time?

[johnhp]

Flyboy

You have been around long enough to know.  It didn't do Angle to well in front of those high school kids..

[Pepsi]

I'm actually sympathetic to bans on the burqa.    Yes, to my senses it's demeaning to woman and I question the self respect of any woman who wears it.   But beyond that it goes against the grain of how we human beings interact with each other.   Without being able to identify someone's face, their facial expression; this is basic human communication which is disabled by the burka.    Also it's a security concern, how can people be identified if their face cannot be seen?

[makesenseplease]

I'm actually sympathetic to bans on the burqa.    Yes, to my senses it's demeaning to woman and I question the self respect of any woman who wears it.   But beyond that it goes against the grain of how we human beings interact with each other.   Without being able to identify someone's face, their facial expression; this is basic human communication which is disabled by the burka.    Also it's a security concern, how can people be identified if their face cannot be seen?

I'm against the burga for different reasons than your's Pepsi.

Times change.  

I communicate over the internet all the time and I seldom see the person's eyes or facial expression.

Security?  People can be identified by asking to see their identification.




  

[johnhp]

I'm actually sympathetic to bans on the burqa.    Yes, to my senses it's demeaning to woman and I question the self respect of any woman who wears it.   But beyond that it goes against the grain of how we human beings interact with each other.   Without being able to identify someone's face, their facial expression; this is basic human communication which is disabled by the burka.    Also it's a security concern, how can people be identified if their face cannot be seen?

Where do you draw the line when it comes to cultural issues?  While i agree that people should not be forced to wear traditional clothing and society should provide every protection for those who refuse to wear things like the burqa, people who wish to wear the burqa should be afforded that option in an open society.

[makesenseplease]

What the hell is that culture protecting itself from? You see dumb fuck a culture includes all people within it. You do not suppress our try elimninating any group within that culture and claim to tbe protecting your culture. What you are doing is excluding, not protecting.

What did the dems do to the Japanese during ww2?

Japanese Americans were part of American culture but the dems decided to lock then up.

Why was this not excluding?  Because the dems did it?

[johnhp]

What did the dems do to the Japanese during ww2?

Japanese Americans were part of American culture but the dems decided to lock then up.

Why was this not excluding?  Because the dems did it?

It was a policy of the government, not a political party.  It was wrong.  Roosevelt's executive order was wrong and the Supreme Court's decision was wrong.

But let's talk about today about our open society protecting itself.  The current suit against Ashcroft needs to go forward without any interference.  It is absolutely wrong for the current administration to go to bat for Ashcroft in this case.  They need to withdraw.  If Holder and by extension Obama do not have the guts to prosecute crimes carried out by American politicians against the people or to allow civil courses to go forward then someone needs to be appointed who will do this.

Holder needs to go.

[makesenseplease]

It was a policy of the government, not a political party.  It was wrong.  Roosevelt's executive order was wrong and the Supreme Court's decision was wrong.

But let's talk about today about our open society protecting itself.  The current suit against Ashcroft needs to go forward without any interference.  It is absolutely wrong for the current administration to go to bat for Ashcroft in this case.  They need to withdraw.  If Holder and by extension Obama do not have the guts to prosecute crimes carried out by American politicians against the people or to allow civil courses to go forward then someone needs to be appointed who will do this.

Holder needs to go.

It's in the hands of the supreme court.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/sc-dc-1019-court-ashcroft-web-20101018,0,1755532.story