Burkas Cast a Veil over Us All – So Ban Them

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: Cultural values that oppress and diminish women have no place in our society

Am I a racist? That’s what I was called on Twitter this week. It happens every time I express my loathing for the burka and the niqab, both hideous shrouds that hide a woman’s face from the world and prevent her – and, therefore, her children – from playing a full part in society.

My accuser on Twitter, one Imran Bhaloo, said it was offensive and racist of me to call a burka a shroud. “You have no right to evaluate culture,” he said. “A burka is not better or worse than a short dress, especially when you’re wearing it to impress someone. At that point, it ceases to be a choice. So how free are you?”

Actually, Mr Bhaloo, I do have a right to “evaluate culture”, as you call it. Mercifully, this is a country in which critical thinking is permitted: if we believe a practice stinks, then we say so. For example, if the Daughter comes downstairs wearing a skirt shorter than a text message, I culturally evaluate it and tell her to get changed pronto.

You ask me how free am I? Well, I’m a lot freer than those poor girls, as young as 11, who attend the Madani Girls’ School in east London. The school, it was revealed yesterday, requires all pupils to wear a burka, or a full-face veil and a long black coat, outside the premises. According to the school’s website, the uniform rule “conforms to the Islamic Code of dressing and must be adhered to at all times”.

How free is an 11-year-old who only sees her city through a letterbox slit, and who is obliged to dress in a way that intimidates people, prevents any connection being made, and ends up stoking even more racist feeling? How free are the children at the Ayesha Siddiqa Girls’ School in west London, which, like other private Islamic schools, requires pupils to wear a burka or jilbab (headscarf)? The Ayesha Siddiqa school had an emergency Ofsted inspection earlier this year that raised concerns about the 120 girls’ “welfare, health and safety”. » | Allison Pearson | Wednesday, September 18, 2013

My comment:

Finally, Brits are coming to the conclusion that the Islamic veil / burqah / niqab / hijab should be banned. It's taken a long time. Many of us have been saying this for years; but we were shouted down by the thought police (and the MSM) for being too intolerant and un-pc. Interestingly, Brits had a go at the French too, for being intolerant of diversity when they banned the burqah. But now, it seems, they have been proved right. They were, of course, right all along.

The burqah has no place in a progressive society. Ban it! – © Mark

This comment appears here too.

Islamic Schools Making Girls Wear Veils and Burkas

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: Young girls are being forced to wear burkas or full-face veils by Islamic schools in Britain.

A number of the religious schools enforce uniform policies where such clothing is mandatory, even for girls as young as 11.

Under the dress code stipulated by the Madani Girls’ School in Tower Hamlets, East London, all pupils must wear a black burka and long black coat when outside.

The girls must also wear headscarves in the classroom and the school says on its website that its uniform rule "conforms to the Islamic Code of dressing and must be adhered to at all times".

The Ayesha Siddiqa Girls School, in Southall, West London, insists its pupils wear a navy blue burka or Jilbab, a long, loose-fitting garment that does not cover the face, when walking between lessons, The Times reported.

According to the school’s website, it is "not willing to compromise on any issues regarding uniform". » | Rosa Silverman | Wednesday, September 2013

My comment:

There was a time in which I was truly proud to be British. Those days are long gone. How can I be proud of being British anymore when the establishment is too weak to stand up for the British way of life, too weak to stand up for what we believe in?

Do the politicians and so-called leaders not realise that to force girls as young as eleven to cover themselves up in this way is a form of child abuse? These children are being deprived of normal contact with other children, they are being deprived of their childhood, and they are being deprived of sunlight, which could lead to rickets. It will certainly not be good for their young skin; it will make many of those young girls spotty.

This practice should be stopped forthwith. The wearing of full veil coverings is not a requirement of Islam anyway. Islam demands of its female adherents modesty, not the full covering of all body parts. The wearing of the burqah and other complete coverings stems from Middle Eastern culture; it has little or nothing to do with Islam. (Not that I am making excuses for that backward religion.)

It is interesting to note that pre-pubescent girls are not forced to cover up even in Saudi Arabia. Even in Saudi Arabia, little girls are allowed to be little girls, and they can play with their contemporaries freely. So if little girls are allowed not to cover themselves before puberty in Saudi Arabia, why should we allow them to be covered up in these ridiculous garments here in the United Kingdom? These garments are unhealthy in more ways than one. They should be banned forthwith. – © Mark

This comment appears here too.

Asking Women to Remove Veil Is Not Racist, Says Former Extremist

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: Asking Muslim women to remove their veils is not racist or Islamaphobic, a former extremist who is now a Parliamentary candidate has said.

Maajid Nawaz, a British-born Muslim who has since renounced his views and is standing as a Liberal Democrat, said girls and women should remove their veils in classrooms, courts, and banks. His intervention came amid a growing political row over the issue.

Theresa May, the Conservative Home Secretary, said “women should be free to decide” for themselves whether to wear a veil. She said it was not for the state to “tell people what they should be wearing”, but added that at schools and courts removing veils may be a “practical necessity”.

Earlier this week, Jeremy Browne, the Lib Dem Home Office minister, told The Telegraph that there should be a “national debate” about whether veils should be banned in public.

MPs and senior judges subsequently called for national guidance to clarify the issue. Mrs May told Sky News that she did “not think the Government should tell women what they should be wearing”. » | Steven Swinford, Senior Political Correspondent | Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Muslim Woman Rebekah Dawson Must Remove Niqab While Giving Evidence, Judge Rules

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: A Muslim woman has been given permission to wear a niqab during a criminal trial but must remove it while giving evidence, a judge has ruled.

Judge Peter Murphy made the ruling in the case of Muslim convert Rebekah Dawson, who is facing trial for allegedly intimidating a witness.

The 22-year-old had claimed her religious beliefs dictated that no male other than her husband could see her face.

Lawyers for the defendant had argued that forcing the 22-year-old convert to remove her niqab in court would be a breach of her rights under Article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

But in a lengthy ruling, Judge Murphy said it was of "cardinal importance" to the adversarial system that a jury could see a defendant's face while giving evidence.

The issue first arose when Mrs Dawson refused to lift her veil in order to identify herself at a plea and case management hearing at Blackfriars Crown Court. » | Martin Evans, Crime Correspondent | Monday, September 16, 2013

Related »

Fully Veiled Women Hinder Progressive Islam

THE INDEPENDENT: Toleration is good but not when it prevents fair interrogation and robust argument

First a British judge, then dedicated educationalists running a British college have been defeated by the aggressive guerrilla army of Muslim Salafists and their misguided allies. At Blackfriars Crown Court, Judge Peter Murphy ordered a 21-year-old, veiled defendant to show her face. The accused had been charged with witness intimidation and pleaded not guilty. Whatever the results of that case, she and her supporters certainly intimidated the judge, who backed down so the trial could proceed.

Birmingham Metropolitan College was similarly cowed and had to reverse a directive forbidding students from covering their faces. One hooded lady crowdsourced a protest against the college. Some overexcited student union members, Muslim objectors and online petitioners have forced a U-turn. Shabana Mahmood, MP for Ladywood, Birmingham, welcomed the capitulation. Happy days. Muslim women can now to go to courts and college in shrouds.

That all-covering gown, that headscarf, that face mask – all affirm and reinforce the belief that women are a hazard to men and society. These are unacceptable, iniquitous values, enforced violently by Taliban, Saudi and Iranian oppressors. They have no place in our country. So why are so many British females sending out those messages about themselves? » | Yasmin Alibhai Brown | Sunday, September 15, 2013

My comment:

'Progressive Islam'? That's an oxymoron if ever there was one. – © Mark

New Dark Age Alert! Will Judge Lift Muslim’s Veil of Secrecy?

THE SUNDAY TELEGRAPH: A senior judge will come under pressure on Monday not to set a “dangerous” legal precedent by allowing a Muslim defendant to wear a full veil in a criminal trial.

The case comes amid a growing row over the wearing of niqabs and burkas in schools and colleges as well as in the court room.

An alliance of Islamic groups and Left-wing activists have been accused of conspiring to put pressure on institutions to overturn existing bans on the wearing of full-face coverings.

In a London courtroom tomorrow, lawyers acting for a 22-year-old Muslim woman will argue her right to religious freedom will be breached if Judge Peter Murphy orders her to remove her veil.

Chris Grayling, the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, is understood to be monitoring the case closely, while senior figures in his ministry firmly believe “it is in the interests of justice for a jury to see the face of the accused”.

The woman’s lawyers are likely to bring an action against the court for breach of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights if the judge rules her trial - for intimidating a witness - should go ahead in November with her face visible to the court.

Article 9, enshrined in British law through the Human Rights Act, guarantees “freedom of conscience, thought and religion”.

The woman’s case has received backing from Liberty, the civil rights campaign group, which has supported the defendant through earlier hearings. » | Robert Mendick, Chief reporter | Sunday, September 15, 2013

My comment:

Wearing the full-face veil is not an article of the Islamic faith. Islam teaches that women should be dressed modestly at all times. Covering one’s face is not necessary in order to be modest. The full Islamic veil is culture-bound, not religion-bound. So the judge need not bellyache over this one. – © Mark

Birmingham College U-turns over Ban on Muslim Veils

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH: A Birmingham college has made a u-turn on its controversial ban on Muslim face veils, just hours before a mass demonstration by hundreds of students.

Birmingham Metropolitan College was accused of discrimination when they ordered all students, staff and visitors to remove any face coverings so individuals are "easily identifiable at all times".

However, they backtracked after a protest petition attracted 8,000 signatures in 48 hours and their policy brought criticism from politicians.

Hundreds of students had planned to gather outside the Matthew Boulton city-centre campus at 2.30pm today to voice their opposition to the policy.

Last night the college said: "We are concerned that recent media attention is detracting from our core mission of providing high quality learning. As a consequence, we will modify our policies to allow individuals to wear specific items of personal clothing to reflect their cultural values. » | Hayley Dixon | Friday, September 13, 2013

Burqa Approved for Swimming in Western Australia
GATES OF VIENNA: The Western Australian health authorities have decided to make an exception for burqa-like swimwear in public swimming pools, on the basis of religious beliefs. Past complaints have cost them dearly in civil lawsuit payouts, so an adjustment to the official policy became necessary.

If non-Muslims were to wear similar clothing, it would be considered unhygienic, and they would not be allowed in the pool. But the magic of Islam can perform many wonders, and one of them seems to be to reverse bad hygiene. Say the shahada, and presto! The bacteria flee from the scene. Read on and comment >>> Baron Bodissey | Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Netherlands to Ban Burka, Says Anti-Islam MP
THE TELEGRAPH: The Netherlands will ban the burka under measures agreed in a pact to form a minority coalition government, according to Geert Wilders, the anti-Islam MP whose party is part of the deal.

In addition to the measures agreed by the three parties, the number of immigrants who enter The Netherlands will be halved, Mr Wilders said as the agreement was announced.

"We want the Islamisation to be stopped," Mr Wilders, who will go on trial in Amsterdam next Monday for inciting hatred against Muslims, said.

Mr Wilders – who campaigns for a ban on Muslim immigration and wants to end the building of new mosques and tax Muslim head scarves – had a say in the plan's immigration policies in return for supporting its austerity measures. >>> | Thursday, September 30, 2010

Australian Court Orders Muslim Witness to Testify Without Burka
THE TELEGRAPH: An Australian court has ruled that a Muslim woman must remove her burka while she gives evidence so that the jury can assess her facial expressions.

Judge Shauna Deane of the Perth District Court said that it was "inappropriate" for the woman, only identified as Tasneem, to have her face covered while testifying in the A$752,000 (£433,000) fraud trial.

Lawyers for Tasneem, 36, had asked the judge to allow her to give evidence while wearing the burka because she had not removed the veil in public as an adult and would find the experience highly stressful.

The full Islamic veil covers the whole body except the eyes and hands.

Mark Ritter, prosecuting, told the court that Tasneem, who emigrated to Australia seven years ago, had worn the garment since she was 17.

He said she wanted to give evidence but would feel uncomfortable without the burka and that could prejudice the way she presented her evidence.

"It goes beyond stress, it would have a negative impact," he said.

However, the defence raised concerns about how the jury could assess her credibility if they could not see her face. They argued that wearing the garment was a cultural, not a religious, choice and that even in Islamic courts women were required to remove the veil. >>> Bonnie Malkin in Sydney | Thursday, August 19, 2010

Burqa Decision Ripples Across World
THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD: IT WAS just one decision made by one judge in one case in Perth and Judge Shauna Deane was at pains to make that clear.

But the impact of her decision yesterday to order a Muslim woman to remove her burqa in Western Australia's District Court is unlikely to remain so localised.

A prosecution witness known only as Tasneem, 36, has kept her surname a secret but will have to show her face in the fraud trial of a former Muslim school director called Anwar Sayed.

Mr Sayed's defence team - to their client's apparent dismay - had argued the jury should be able to see her facial expressions.
Tasneem had a ''right to religious expression'', Judge Deane found, but she had to be fair to everyone involved in the trial.

The decision was reported around the world and will be popular in Western Australia, with about 80 per cent of 3000 recent respondents to the watoday.com.au and 6PR radio websites believing the witness should be made to remove her burqa. >>> Joel Gibson | Friday, August 20, 2010

Judge Bans Burqa From Perth Court
WA TODAY: The Muslim woman who wished to testify while wearing a full-face veil says she accepts the decision by a Perth District Court judge to ban the niqab.

The 36-year old woman, known only as Tasneem, is a witness in a case against Anwar Sayed.

Mr Sayed is accused of fraudulently stealing up to $750,000 in public funds by artificially inflating student numbers at his school, the Muslim Ladies College in Perth's southern suburbs.

Today, judge Shauna Deane said that in the interest of a fair trial the witness should not be allowed to wear a niqab, commonly known as a burqa.

But she said she would speak to counsel about ways to accommodate Tasneem's desire to maintain her modesty in line with how she practices her faith.

Tasneem issued a written statement following the decision, which said: "I accept her decision and thank her for her careful consideration of this matter.

"I appreciate my request to wear my niqab in court has stirred much public debate, however, I would emphasise that this was not a demand, I merely asked to dress as I normally would in front of people I do not know."

She said she was not trying to make a religious statement.

"This is my personal choice and rather than oppressing me, it liberates me," Tasneem said.

"Like many Australians I believe in God and for me wearing the niqab serves as a constant reminder that I am accountable for my actions.

"I respect that other women who share my religion do not share this particular belief and that interpretations surrounding Islamic dress standards do differ.

"Therefore I understand this can be confusing for non-Muslims as they witness varying degrees of cover and I accept the full cover I choose to wear can be confronting to some." (+ video) >>> Aja Styles | Thursday, August 19, 2010

Richard Dawkins Sparks Outcry After Likening the Burka to a Bin Liner
THE TELEGRAPH: Richard Dawkins, the outspoken atheist, has courted fresh controversy by likening the burka to a bin liner.

The 69-year-old author and Oxford academic said he is filled with “visceral revulsion” when he sees women wearing the traditional Islamic covering.

But he held back from advocating a ban on the all-enveloping cloak, insisting that such legislation would fly in the face of Britain’s liberal tradition.

Professor Dawkins referred to the burka as a “full bin-liner thing” in an interview with the Radio Times in which he discussed his forthcoming documentary on the dangers of faith schools.

He has sparked fury among Muslim groups, who have accused him of being “ignorant” and “Islamophobic”.

But he stood by his remarks last night, telling the Daily Mail: “I do feel visceral revulsion at the burka because for me it is a symbol of the oppression of women.” >>> Heidi Blake | Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Burqa Trial Man Anwar Sayed 'Brutally Stabbed'
Anwar Sayed (right), with lawyer Andrew Skerritt at a previous trial appearance. Photograph: WA Today
WA TODAY: The man whose trial has led to controversy over the wearing of a Muslim headscarf in court has been "brutally stabbed" after being stopped in his car, his lawyer says.

Anwar Sayed, who a court yesterday heard had received written and verbal death threats for supposedly agitating to abolish the wearing of a niqab, also known as a burqa, was allegedly attacked this morning.

Mr Sayed is alleged to have obtained more than $750,000 from federal and state governments by artificially inflating student numbers at Muslim Ladies College in Kenwick.

But the case has been overshadowed by the niqab issue, which has raised legal questions on whether the witness should be entitled to obscure her face from the judge and jury.

While a date was being set today for Mr Sayed's retrial, his lawyer Mark Trowell said the school director had been "brutally stabbed to the chest and face, his car having been stopped".

Mr Trowell told the court Mr Sayed had taken himself to his office after being stabbed, before being rushed to hospital. (+ videos) >>> Chalpat Sonti with AAP | Friday, August 06, 2010

Related >>>

Baroness Warsi Is Just Plain WRONG!
MAIL ONLINE: Wearing a burka does not prevent Muslim women ‘engaging in everyday life’ in Britain, the Conservative Party chairman Sayeeda Warsi claimed today.

In comments that will reignite the row about the full face veil, Baroness Warsi defended the right of Muslim women to ‘choose’ to wear the burka.

Backbench Tory MPs have launched a bid to ban the wearing of the burka in public.

Critics claim the burka is a symbol of oppression, with some Muslim women ordered to wear the full face veil by their husbands.

But Lady Warsi, the first Muslim woman to serve in the Cabinet, yesterday launched a passionate defence of the burka. She suggested that many Muslim women choose to wear the veil of their own free will.

Lady Warsi, who was named last year as Britain’s most powerful Muslim woman, said: ‘Just because a woman wears the burka, it doesn’t mean she can’t engage in everyday life.

‘Why should we tell women what to wear? What it boils down to is choice. If women don’t have a choice over what to wear then they are oppressed.

‘But if a woman has a choice, and she chooses to wear whatever she chooses to wear then she’s not oppressed is she? She’s choosing what she wants.’

Critics claim that the burka alienates Muslim women from the rest of society. But Lady Warsi said the burka did not act as a barrier in itself.

She added: ‘There are women who wear the burka who run extremely successful businesses – internet businesses, which don’t actually require you to be there face to face.’

Lady Warsi’s intervention is the latest bid by the coalition Government to close down debate about the burka. Tory party chairman says Muslim women SHOULD be allowed to wear the Burka >>> Jason Groves | Monday, August 02, 2010

Israeli Rabbis Clamp Down On Burka
THE TELEGRAPH: Israeli rabbis are to clamp down on the growing number of devout Jewish women wearing the burka by declaring the garment an item of sexual deviancy.

The move was prompted by the husbands of some burka-wearing women. Photo: The Telegraph
At the insistence of the husbands of some burka-wearing women, a leading rabbinical authority is to issue an edict declaring burka wearing a sexual fetish that is as promiscuous as wearing too little.

A small group of ultra-orthodox Jews in the town of Beit Shemesh chose to don the burka, usually associated with women in repressive Islamist regimes, three years ago in a bid to protect their modesty.

Since then, the habit has spread to five other Israeli towns causing alarm among ultra-orthodox religious leaders who once saw it as a relatively harmless eccentricity – even though the number of Jewish burka wearers is not thought to be more than a few hundred.

“There is a real danger that by exaggerating, you are doing the opposite of what is intended [resulting in] severe transgressions in sexual matters,” Shlomo Pappenheim, a member of the rabbinical authority preparing to make the edict, was quoted as saying. >>> Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem | Friday, July 30, 2010

Indian Lecturer Barred from Teaching by Students for Refusing Burka
THE TELEGRAPH: A female lecturer has been prevented from teaching at a Muslim university in eastern India by students demanding that she wear a burka, according to a report.

Aliah University in Calcutta is the first Muslim university in India's West Bengal state and has no formal dress code, but its student union has demanded that female teachers cover themselves with a Muslim veil in class.

Sirin Middya told the Indian Express she had refused to comply and had been prevented from teaching for three months.

"Most of the teachers do not like the diktat of the students to wear the burka, but they have no option but to accept it," she told the newspaper. "This is the Talibanisation of educational premises and there is no one to come to our rescue." >>> | Thursday, July 29, 2010

Jeremy Clarkson Outrages Viewers by Announcing on Top Gear He'd Seen Saucy Underwear Beneath Muslim Woman's Burka
MAIL ONLINE: Jeremy Clarkson has joined the debate on whether burkas should be permitted in Britain in his own inimitable style.

The outspoken presenter provoked a flurry of complaints after telling viewers of Top Gear on Sunday night that he had seen a Muslim woman wearing saucy underwear beneath her gown.

Clarkson had been discussing the best way to stop drivers being distracted by female pedestrians, along with co-presenters Richard Hammond and James May.

More than six million viewers had tuned in to watch the show, which featured guest appearances from Hollywood stars Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz.

In front of the studio audience, he said: 'This is an important bit of news, I really want to bring this up. People imagine that the most dangerous time of the year to drive is November or perhaps February - dark nights, fog, ice.

'But we were talking about this the other day and we think the most dangerous time to drive a car is round about now. Sunny skies, light breezes, girls wearing short skirts, because the thing is, you can't not look. You can't physically not look.'

Hammond interjected, saying: 'You can physically not use your mobile phone and it's easy not to drive home when you've had 18 pints of lager. But when you're driving along and a girl walks past, you have to look. Actually, do you not think that here, there is actually a case for the burka? Because then the problem would go away.'

Clarkson then replied: 'No, no, no. Honestly, the burka doesn't work. I was in a cab in Piccadilly the other day when a woman in a full burka crossing the road in front of me tripped over the pavement, went head over heels and up it came, red g-string and stockings. I promise that happened. The taxi driver will back me up on that.'

Despite disbelief from his co-stars, Clarkson again insisted the incident took place.

By yesterday morning, seven viewers had already contacted the BBC to complain, while singer Lily Allen labelled the comment 'distasteful' on her Twitter site.

Another viewer wrote: 'Clarkson is too old for mini skirt jokes - burka story obscene - horrid.' >>> Simon Cable and Paul Revoir | Tuesday, July 27, 2010

THE TELEGRAPH: Jeremy Clarkson joins burka debate: Jeremy Clarkson has provoked a flurry of complaints after telling Top Gear viewers he saw a woman wearing a G-string and stockings beneath her burka. >>> Ben Leach | Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Muslim Women 'Refused Bus Ride' Over Veil
YNET NEWS: Two students claim London bus driver told them, ''I am not going to take you on the bus because you two are a threat'

London bus company Metroline said on Friday it was investigating claims by two Muslim women that they were not allowed to get on a bus in the capital because one of them was wearing a face veil.

The company confirmed an incident involving two 22-year-old students from Slough, Berkshire took place on a No. 7 bus at Russell Square on Tuesday.

The firm said the women had made a complaint to Transport for London (TfL) and that Metroline was following it up, but stressed it was still merely an allegation at this stage.

Interviewed by the BBC, Yasmin, who was wearing a hijab, which leaves the face and hands uncovered, and Atoofa, dressed in a niqab which covers the face but leaves the area around the eyes open, said they were stopped from boarding because of their appearance.

"He (the bus driver) said, 'I am not going to take you on the bus because you two are a threat,'" Yasmin said. >>> Reuters | Friday, July 23, 2010

YNET NEWS: Poll: Most Brits back face veil ban – Two-thirds of British public say they want to follow in France, Belgium's footsteps, outlaw burqas‬ >>> Ynet | Friday, July 16, 2010

La Syrie interdit le niqab à l'université
Deux Syriennes portant le niqab font leurs courses lundi à Damas. Photo : Le Figaro
LE FIGARO: Damas, qui veut protéger son «identité laïque», n'autorise plus depuis dimanche les étudiantes à porter le voile intégral. Déjà, en juin, 1200 enseignantes du primaire, qui l'arboraient, avaient été mutées dans des services administratifs.

Le débat sur le voile intégral n'agite pas uniquement les pays européens. Il s'est aussi emparé du Proche-Orient. La Syrie interdit depuis dimanche aux étudiantes des universités de porter la burqa ou le niqab. Dorénavant, les étudiantes arborant le voile intégral ne pourront plus s'inscrire dans les établissements privés et publics du secondaire. En revanche le foulard reste toujours autorisé. Du coté des autorités syriennes, on explique avoir voulu protéger «l'identique laïque» du pays.

Le ministre de l'Education supérieure, qui a publié le décret, affirme avoir reçu de nombreuses plaintes de parents demandant «à ce que leurs filles soient éduquées dans des lieux dépourvu de tout extrémisme». «Nous ne laisserons pas nos filles être la proie de telles idées», a promis le ministre à ses collaborateurs. Pour Ghiath Barakat, «le voile intégral va à l'encontre des principes académiques et des règles des campus», rapporte la chaîne Al-Arabiya. >>> Par lefigaro.fr | Mardi 20 Juillet 2010

Syria Bans Niqab from Universities
THE GUARDIAN: Regime fears face-covering Islamic veil poses threat to country's secular identity

Niqabs such as this will not be seen in any Syrian university once the country's new measures come into force. Photograph: The Guardian
Syria has banned the face-covering Islamic veil from the country's universities to prevent what it sees as a threat to its secular identity, as similar moves in Europe spark cries of discrimination against Muslims.

The education ministry issued the ban on Sunday, according to a government official. The ban, which affects public and private universities, is only against the niqab – a full Islamic veil that reveals just a woman's eyes – not headscarves, which are far more commonly worn by Syrian women.

The billowing black robe known as a niqab is not widespread in Syria, although it has become more common recently – a move that has not gone unnoticed in a country governed by a secular, authoritarian regime.

"We have given directives to all universities to ban niqab-wearing women from registering," the government official said today.
The niqab "contradicts university ethics," he added, saying the government was seeking to protect its secular identity. >>> Associated Press in Damascus | Tuesday, July 20, 2010

The Burka Empowering Women? You Must Be Mad, Minister
MAIL ONLINE: These British apologists for the burka make me see red, whatever side of the political spectrum they come from.

They can be Left-wingers who'll countenance no criticism, however valid, of hardline Muslims. They can be Right-wing libertarians who insist any woman has the right to wear whatever she chooses.

And, as we discovered this week, they can be members of the British Cabinet who ludicrously claim the burka actually empowers women.

Yes, Caroline Spelman, the Environment Secretary, really did claim that the burka delivers its wearer blissful freedom. As a Muslim, you might expect me to agree with her, but I can't. She is wrong. Her fatuous and ill-conceived defence of the burka rendered me apoplectic with fury.

Does she even understand the harm she does by sanctioning this perversion of our faith?

Immigrant Muslims who came to Britain to get away from Stalinist ayatollahs, mullahs and women-hating fanatic regimes in their home countries must be spitting their teeth out after hearing Spelman's astounding endorsement of this dreadful garment.

We Muslims who came here wanted the freedom that Britain's proud history of democracy was renowned for. We wanted better education for our children and to live and pray in peace in a country which, for all its faults, gives us civil rights and equality between the sexes.

Yet Spelman's support for the burka suddenly puts all of our expectations under threat; for the most obvious manifestation of the oppressive Islam we left behind is welcomed here with the blessing of the ruling elite.

I'd like to invite Mrs Spelman to prove she believes what she says by wearing the black sheet and mask - surely she should do that as an act of solidarity with the 'empowered' Muslim sisters she admires so much.

And if she chooses not to, if she feels she would find wearing a burka limiting and suffocating, why on earth is she breezily recommending it as a garment for other women?

Would she honestly be so upbeat about the burka if a daughter of hers hid herself away inside its veil, or if her son brought home a totally veiled bride-to-be? I don't think so. She and the rest of the 'liberal-minded' burka brigade can only afford to be generous because the burka does not - and never will - affect their own lives, nor test their powers of endurance. To check out the shrouded sisters who tell me they feel ' beautifully' liberated under a veil, I tried wearing a burka for a day - and threw it off in a couple of hours, wheezing asthmatically.

I felt wiped out, a nobody - lifeless and voiceless. A Pakistani shopkeeper said I made him nervous because he couldn't see my face. I saw others shrinking away from me - and I could understand their reactions. So, will the defenders of the burka brand me and the shopkeeper racist? I wouldn't put it past them.

In truth, I am a life-long anti-racist and die-hard defender of Muslims - yet one who abhors veils as do countless other Muslims.

It is a view that has provoked fury and warnings from veiled women, who self-righteously tell me that uncovered Muslim females will end up in hell unless they repent. Women like me, they warn, are 'western whores' who should be thrown on the eternal fire, along with our mothers.

Of course, many veiled Muslim women argue that, far from being forced to wear burkas by ruthless husbands, they do so out of choice. And I have to take them at their word. But it is also very apparent that many women are forced behind the veil. Continue reading and comment >>> Yasmin Alibhai-Brown | Tuesday, July 20, 2010

What a Silly, Stupid, Idiotic Thing to Say! Is This Really the Calibre of This Parliament?
THE SUNDAY TELEGRAPH: Wearing a burka can be 'empowering ' and 'dignified' for Mulsim [sic] women, one of the Government’s most senior female ministers has said.

The controversial remarks by Caroline Spelman, who as Environment Secretary is the second most powerful woman in the Cabinet, were immediately described as “moronic” and “bizarre”.

She is also likely to face anger from back bench Conservative MPs, some of whom have called for the burka – the covering which some Muslim women adopt in public to hide their face, hair and body – to be banned outside of private homes.

Mrs Spelman made her remarks when asked in an interview what she thought of the recent decision by French MPs to introduce a law outlawing the burka in public.

Critics of the ban, including her fellow ministers, have argued that while they do not like to see women covering their faces, particularly if forced to do so by male relatives, legislation is heavy-handed and contrary to the principle of freedom of expression.

But the Environment Secretary’s suggestion that wearing the burka could in fact be seen as a feminist statement will raise eyebrows.

She said that she held her view “as a woman,” and claimed that her experience of visiting Afghanistan had persuaded her that “the burka confers dignity”.

Her remarks are particularly controversial given that before the Taliban was driven out of large parts of Afghanistan with the help of British troops, millions of women were forced under threat of physical violence to wear the veil in public.

British soldiers still gauge the level of threat from the Taliban in a particular area by assessing whether local women feel the need to cover themselves.

But Mrs Spelman insisted that the burka was “empowering”. She told Sky News: “I take a strong view on this, actually. Caroline Spelman: wearing burka can be ‘empowering’ >>> Rosa Prince, Political Correspondent | Sunday, July 18, 2010

Burka Ban Would 'Not Be British'
SKY NEWS: A senior female Cabinet minister says Britain should not ban the burka. Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman told Sky News a ban would be "un-British".