i agree with it.
Printable View
i agree with it.
As far as I'm concerned, anybody who says they should be allowed, has no right to then complain about motorcycle helmets (as has been mentioned) but also hoodies. When I hear people complain about hoodies, a Facebook group springs to mind; 'I wear a hoodie to keep warm, not because I want to stab you'. Basically, all forms of garments which help to conceal one's identity, should be treated with the same rules - whether they are allowed or not is a different story.
i see letterbox faces everywhere
sounds like a good idea
Good idea. If someone was wearing one and walked into a bank I was in I'd be worried. Common sense really..
I'm not for banning clothing but I don't see why they wear the full get up, surely the scarf will suffice?
i dont think burkas should be banned, however i also dont think that means we shouldnt look down upon the idea of burkas. i dont think theres any legal standing to ban them, since i see it as a violation of rights. but really, as racist as it may seem, i dont have to respect their culture. the rest of the world has been able to gracefully apply the rights of women in progress, there's no reason they should be so far behind in terms of social rights. all other religions have been able to overcome their blatantly sexist origins, islam should too. but, again, my stance is that they should not be banned, we cant force anything.
Yeah but if we go to their country, our women HAVE to wear them.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedStratocas
Just a general question, do you see many people wearing them in NY?
yeah exactly my point lol, its pretty ridic tbh. but honestly i just see banning them causing unnecessary controversy and could possibly backfire, seeing how many middle eastern muslims take absolutely any offense of their religion (say, a cartoon depiction of muhammad) far too seriously. i think theyve gotta take the progress on their own.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio
to be honest with you i cant recall having ever seen a woman in a burka in the united states. there's plenty of religious getups in nyc, especially near penn station and grand central, but the only time ive ever seen a woman wearing one was when i was outside the airport in london back in august.
Im gonna go for a .. I agree with UKIP, they should ban them altogether - i also agree with what my local BNP MP says "If you abide by our rules we accept you - if you live on benefits and make no attempt at following our culture - Piss off
I guess the Jews probably went to you the most out of all the religions. That's the one cool religion tbh :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by RedStratocas
Sudenly I vote UKIP.
If a female from the 'west' went to Iran or a Muslim countr they would be EXPECTED towhere a Burka.
If you come to a countr in the west, you sould be forced to live by our rules or **** off :)
Can anyone prove that when a woman goes to Dubai, Pakistan etc, they have to wear a burka?
Good they're mingin
the whole point of our western ideals, however, is that we are open-minded and let people have freedom of religion and culture. we dont have "rules" governing peoples' ideals at all. so the argument could be made that by banning it we're just stooping to their level and are no better than an oppressive nation. btw they dont force women to wear burkas in iran, theyre a relatively progressive muslim nation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demala
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
i dont think its a law anywhere but it is culturally looked down upon if you don't wear a burka. if you went to baghdad without one, the police wouldnt get you, but i would sure as hell watch out for their citizens.
my cousins live in jordan (muslim country) and they don't wear a burkha. and they are muslims.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
Well do you know if it is or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
It's scary how many people have started supporting the UKIP after this discussion.
Have you even had a look/understand their policies and what they stand for?
And this is why you shouldn't vote UKIP.
Multiculturalism ftw!
Everybody should have their rights.
Hence I was asking ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio
People say you must wear burka's in Muslim countries. I am sure when most western people go to Dubai, they don't start wearing burka's. Same applies for Pakistan.
Well it's not a threat really, 'terrorists' are simply a false image conjured by the government to give society an enemy. Al Qaeda aren't responsible for terorrist attacks - though that doesn't excuse people who believe they are and decide martyrdom is their path. Terrorism is a fallacy used for social cohesion. I am not one to believe in conspiracies, but the major 'attack' blamed on Osama bin Laden - 9/11 - was a false flag attack and this has been proven over and over, the thermate (thermite) found in the rubble, the way the girders in the middle of the WTCs have obvious signs of cutting, the fact that it would take several planes (made from aluminium) to take down a steel building.
Sorry to have derailed the topic but there has been enough of this now.
Who created the Taliban. People should go find out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wig44.
Are you claiming that there are no such people as terrorists and they are simply figments of the goverments imagination? :S
This is why we shouldn't give UKIP power.
That is all.
As we can clearly see from posts like above, and throughout this thread - the people incharge with views such as these are the ones who treat us like second class citzens of our own country because they are too afraid of upsetting the extremist parts of a minority. And they wonder why the BNP keep gaining support?
Good call.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cod
A simple way of putting it. There is no Al Qaida. There is no islamic army.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demala
Of course there is a bloody Al Qaida - what planet are you on?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wig44.
Are you now saynig there is no ETA?
Earth. You can't respect people's opinions at all, simply because you don't understand them. Terrorism is a myth, some people may imitate them but the so called war on terorrism is just another way to bring profits in to the pocket of the rich elite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demala
For instance, pre US controlled-Afghanistan produced almost no opium, with US control it supplied 80% of the worlds supply around 1999-2000. Then the taliban burned all the opium fields in 2000. How did the USA respond? They (the US government) carried out 9/11 on their own people, and used that as an excuse to invade. Through US control they have managed to push production back up to 80%.
You know that for a society to exist it needs an enemy, right? Cohesion through conflict. At least, having an enemy draws attention away from the government. The UK and the USA have conjured this myth of Al Qaeda so they can justify their wars to the people.
Now, pockets of individuals who believed there was a terrorist movement actually idiolize these people, therefore there are pockets of 'terrorists'.
The motive behind this myth? Preserving the establishment. The anti terorrism measures and the huge power the establishment has due to these measures is simply for self-preservation.
While I don't agree with the extent of what Wig is saying, its true that the terrorist threat has been over-done to justify taking away civil liberties and to justify unjust wars such as the invasion of Iraq, Michael Moores Farenheit 9/11 provides excellent examples of how the Bush Administration took the terrorist threat and turned it into something far bigger than it actually was to justify toppling Saddam Hussein and introducing laws which in a pre-terror world would never of seen the light of day because they are simply wrong and do not have a place in a free and democratic nation.
The same equally applies to our own government and councils and how they have used and still use terrorist laws for a number of trivial things.
So ETA, Al Qaeda etc are all myths. Yes?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wig44.
Al Qaeda is a myth. Terorrism exists but is far, far rarer than prescribed by the media. It's just a way of smearing opposition to the machine that has an economic empire around the world, controlled by debt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demala
Please, instead of bashing me actually read between the lines.
So.... Tony Blair blew up the buses in London?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wig44.
On the day of the 7/7 bombings, there was a training exercise of the 'exact same scenario' as the real attack, just like what happened with NORAD on the day of 9/11. Draw up your own conclusions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio
That doesn't make sense though... if that were the case wouldn't the London bombings BECOME the training exercise? :S
The training exercise was to throw off defenses in place, just like NORAD had no chance of taking down over 40 possible targets because they had several training exercises on the day of the 9/11 bombings, one of which was the WTCs being bombed. There are recorded transcripts of the pilots asking 'is this real-world of exercise?'. It was to deter suspicion within the lower ranks, the grunts who aren't entitled to the knowledge held by the elite few.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio
OH OK, I get it now :P. But still, it's not like there are any immediate defences for a guy blowing up a bus so I don't see the point of trying to prevent the defences, if you get me..
What is our culture?Quote:
Originally Posted by HC0R3H00LIH00P
Drink as much as you can.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifuseekamy