<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; niqab</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/niqab/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 16:20:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Airport Security &amp; Double Standards</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-menzies/airport-security-double-standards/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=airport-security-double-standards</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-menzies/airport-security-double-standards/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Sep 2013 04:09:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Menzies]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[airport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hijab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Los Angeles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niqab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=203710</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At LAX, some head coverings are more equal than others. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/niqab-2.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-203750" alt="niqab-2" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/niqab-2.jpg" width="288" height="193" /></a>“Take off the cap!” barked the TSA official working security at Los Angeles International Airport.</p>
<p>The recipient of this curt order was my young son, Sean, who was brandishing a Batman baseball cap. News Flash: Apparently, 11-year-old Canadians are responsible for a disproportionate amount of terrorism. But I digress…</p>
<p>In any event, the kid complied and dad (for a change) kept his triple-XL mouth shut. When you have a flight to catch it’s seldom prudent to perturb those ever-so-pleasant folks working airport security.</p>
<p>Still, I felt compelled to return to the screening area once the family was safely seated in the departure lounge. And here’s what I observed: some Muslim women proceeded through the checkpoint without having to remove<i> their</i> headwear (hijabs.)</p>
<p>How odd. If one can presumably stash a box-cutter or a dollop of C4 underneath a baseball cap, surely an hijab can serve the same purpose?</p>
<p>I approached a policeman standing guard. I politely asked him: why the apparent double-standard?</p>
<p>He told me hijabs cannot be removed because “that would be against their religion.”</p>
<p>I corrected the officer, noting there’s nothing in the Koran that mandates the wearing of the hijab.</p>
<p>“OK,” he conceded. “But it’s a cultural thing or something.”</p>
<p>Or something.</p>
<p>Then he said in a tone reminiscent of how a principal would speak to a seven-year-old: “You see, sir, in America, Americans and people visiting America have rights.”</p>
<p>No argument there. Except for a small caveat: surely there’s a reasonable expectation that one’s “rights” will be curtailed somewhat when one enters an airport. That’s why we are prodded and poked and X-rayed when we proceed through security in the first place. That’s why one can’t waltz into a terminal brandishing a legal handgun.</p>
<p>The cop simply shrugged. I upped the ante: if those women had been wearing full-face coverings such as a burqa or niqab, would they have been forced to unveil to confirm their identities?</p>
<p>“Nope,” came the reply. “It’s because that’s a religion thing, too.”</p>
<p>My jaw was now resting on the linoleum.</p>
<p>Reminding him that the vast amount of terrorism in the world today emanates from those shouting “Allahu Akbar!” before pressing the detonator, the poor constable’s face contoured as though he had just bitten into a sour lemon. Our conversation was over.</p>
<p>Still, on reflection, perhaps I got off easy. After all, I wasn’t detained against my will and put through the wringer – which is precisely what happened to author David Jones at London’s Gatwick Airport last year.</p>
<p>According to an article in <i>The Telegraph</i>, Jones placed his belongings into a tray to pass through the X-ray scanner when he spotted a Muslim woman in a niqab breeze through the area without showing her face.</p>
<p>In a light-hearted aside to a security official who had been assisting him, the 67-year-old said: “If I was wearing this scarf over my face, I wonder what would happen?”</p>
<p>Oh dear. Red alert! Jones was promptly accused of racism and sequestered. An airport security guard, a British Airlines official, and even a policeman all agreed he had been “insensitive” with his comment and needed to apologize. After being detained for almost half-an-hour, Jones issued a <i>mea culpa</i>; otherwise, he risked missing his flight to Portugal.</p>
<p>But Jones also rightly noted: “I had not made a racist remark but purely an observation that we were in a maximum security situation being searched thoroughly whilst a woman with her face covered walked through. I made no reference to race or religion.”</p>
<p>Amazingly, Department for Transport rules don’t prevent people covering their faces at U.K. airports for – you got it – “religious reasons.”</p>
<p>Bottom line: Wednesday marks the 12<sup>th</sup> anniversary of 9/11. How sad that whatever lessons we supposedly learned on that dark day back in 2001 already seem to have been sacrificed upon the alter of political correctness.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-menzies/airport-security-double-standards/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>26</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Philadelphia&#8217;s Burqa Crisis</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/daniel-pipes/philadelphias-burqa-crisis/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=philadelphias-burqa-crisis</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/daniel-pipes/philadelphias-burqa-crisis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 04:31:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Pipes]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[burqa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niqab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philadelphia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=178613</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The more full-body coverings around, the more likely they will facilitate criminal activity.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/daniel-pipes/philadelphias-burqa-crisis/black-burqa/" rel="attachment wp-att-178689"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-178689" title="black-burqa" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/black-burqa-441x350.jpg" alt="" width="170" height="134" /></a>Reprinted from <a href="http://www.danielpipes.org/12553/philadelphia-burqa">DanielPipes.org</a>.</strong></p>
<p>Philadelphia, the city where I live, has quietly and unassumedly become the capital of the Western world as regards female Islamic garb as an accessory to crime.</p>
<p>First, a tutorial on Islamic coverings, all of which tend to be called <em>veils</em> in English but fall into three main categories. Some (the <em>abaya</em>, <em>hijab</em>, <em>chador</em>, <em>jilbab</em>, or <em>khimar</em>) cover parts of the body, especially the hair, neck, and shoulders, but reveal the face and identity of the woman; some cover the face (the <em>yashmak</em>) but show the body shape; and some hide the whole body, including the identity and gender of the wearer. The latter – our topic here – is better described as a full-body cover than a veil: it in turn has two types, those that cover the person entirely (the <em>chadari</em> or <em>burqa</em>) or those with a slit for the eyes (the <em>haik</em> or <em>niqab</em>).</p>
<p>By <a href="http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2006/11/niqabs-and-burqas-as-security-threats">my count</a>, the Philadelphia region has witnessed 14 robberies (or attempted robberies) of financial institutions in the past six years in which the thieves relied on an Islamic full-body cover. They took place in January 2007, June 2007, May 2008, November 2009, October 2010 (two), February 2011, June 2011, December 2011, January 2012, March 2012 (two), and April 2012 (two). The most violent attack took place on May 3, 2008, when Police Sergeant Stephen Liczbinski was killed with an AK-47 in a shoot-out following a successful robbery using burqas; the police then killed one of the criminals.</p>
<p>As the Middle East Forum&#8217;s <a href="http://www.islamist-watch.org/10420/philadelphia-and-the-burqa-bandits">David J. Rusin</a> points out in his detailed <a id="_GPLITA_0" title="Click to Continue &gt; by Text-Enhance" href="http://www.danielpipes.org/12553/philadelphia-burqa#">survey</a> of Philadelphia burqa crimes, Muslim garb holds two great advantages over other forms of disguise: First, many full-body covered women walk the streets without criminal intent, thereby inadvertently providing cover for thieves; the more full-body coverings around, the more likely that these will facilitate criminal activity. Second, the very strangeness and aloofness of these garments affords their wearers, including criminals, an extraordinary degree of protection. As in other cases (three purchases of alcohol in <a href="http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/featured/news/868018287001/how-to-buy-alcohol-when-underage-wear-a-burka/1750786164001">Toronto state liquor stores</a> by a 14-year-old boy in a burqa; Muslim women not checked at <a href="http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2010/08/niqab-security-outrages-at-canadian-airports">Canadian airports</a>), clerks so fear being accused of racism or &#8220;Islamophobia&#8221; that they <a id="_GPLITA_2" title="Click to Continue &gt; by Text-Enhance" href="http://www.danielpipes.org/12553/philadelphia-burqa#">skip</a> state-mandated procedures, such as requiring niqabis to show their faces and establish their identities.</p>
<p>To <a id="_GPLITA_3" title="Click to Continue &gt; by Text-Enhance" href="http://www.danielpipes.org/12553/philadelphia-burqa#">their credit</a>, some banks no longer allow head coverings. For example, a <a href="http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2009/01/banks-and-stores-push-back-against-head-coverings#PNC">PNC Bank</a>office in Philadelphia boasts a front-door sign stating: &#8220;The safety of our employees and customers is our foremost concern. We request that you remove any hats, caps, sunglasses or hoods while inside this financial institution.&#8221; Such policies should reduce burqa bank robberies.</p>
<p>But as <a id="_GPLITA_4" title="Click to Continue &gt; by Text-Enhance" href="http://www.danielpipes.org/12553/philadelphia-burqa#">banks</a> become harder targets, Islamic garb presents a more general danger to soft targets. For example, in the Philadelphia area, assailants donned Islamic garb to rob a <a href="http://articles.philly.com/2008-05-02/news/25261086_1_police-officer-silver-handgun-carjacked">real estate office</a> in 2008 and commit murder at a <a href="http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2012/05/15/news/doc4fb1d0e86dbbf515204165.txt">barber shop</a> in 2012.</p>
<p>Not fatal but equally horrific, was the Jan. 14-15 abduction and rape of a 5-year-old child in Philadelphia. A niqabi signed <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/missing-pa-girl-abducted-school-found/story?id=18217095">Nailla Robinson</a> out from the Bryant Elementary School pretending to be her mother taking her to breakfast. Investigators believe the two walked a few blocks to where a man awaited them. Nailla then disappeared for nearly a day and was only found the next morning shivering half-naked in a park by a passerby. Last week, the police arrested <a href="http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/abduction-girl-philadelphia-191243971.html%27">Christina Regusters</a>, 19, an daycare center employee with prior contact with Nailla. The fourteen charges against her include kidnapping, rape, aggravated assault, recklessly endangering another person, and criminal conspiracy.</p>
<p>The usual two factors noted above were critical to this crime&#8217;s commission: the spread of full-body gear (Nailla&#8217;s mother, <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/missing-philly-girl-found-article-1.1240265">Latifah Rashid</a>, wears Islamic garb, meaning the abductor could plausibly pretend to be her) and the Bryant school staff deferring to a niqabi (completely <a href="http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/20596507/kidnapping-at-school-what-went-wrong">ignoring the many rules</a>pertaining to the escorting of a child from school).</p>
<p>This survey of Philadelphia&#8217;s crisis prompts several reflections: First, almost any Western city at any time could have Philadelphia&#8217;s problems. Second, this is deadly serious issue, involving violent robberies, rapes, and murders. Third, as full-body Islamic covers spread, criminals increasingly depend on them. Fourth, government workers need to surmount their timidity and apply normal procedures even to those wearing full-body covers, even in liquor shops, airports, and elementary schools. Finally, this problem has an obvious solution: <a href="http://www.meforum.org/2777/ban-the-burqa">ban the niqab and burqa</a> in public places, as the national governments in <a href="http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/08/europes-burqa-wars">France and Belgium</a> have recently done.</p>
<p>Mr. Pipes (<a href="http://www.danielpipes.org/">DanielPipes.org</a>) is president of the Middle East Forum. <em>© 2013 by Daniel Pipes. All rights reserved.</em></p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank">Click here</a>.  </strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/daniel-pipes/philadelphias-burqa-crisis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Muslim in Niqab Carries Out Acid Attack on Victoria&#8217;s Secret Employee</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/muslim-in-niqab-carries-out-acid-attack-on-london-victorias-secret-employee/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=muslim-in-niqab-carries-out-acid-attack-on-london-victorias-secret-employee</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/muslim-in-niqab-carries-out-acid-attack-on-london-victorias-secret-employee/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 02:36:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Greenfield]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Point]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamizationofeurope]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niqab]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=175994</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Washington D.C. is talking about banning ski masks to fight masked crime. It might be time to ban the Burka and the Niqab and any Muslim clothing that closes off the face for the same reason. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/muslim-in-niqab-carries-out-acid-attack-on-london-victorias-secret-employee/italy-niqab/" rel="attachment wp-att-175995"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-175995" title="Italy niqab" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Italy-niqab-450x300.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="300" /></a></p>
<p>Washington D.C. is talking about <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/30/ski-mask-is-fashion-accessory-to-crime-in-dc/">banning ski masks to fight masked crime</a>. It might be time to ban the Burka and the Niqab and any Muslim clothing that closes off the face for the same reason. There have been a few too many crimes committed lately by people wearing Muslim gear. It&#8217;s not always possible to know whether these people are Muslims, but the fact of the matter is that normalizing clothing that serves as an effective public disguise is a crutch for crime.</p>
<p>Masks are already banned in many cities. It&#8217;s time to ban the Niqab as well which is nothing but Taliban wear anyway. And anyone who wants to wear one, can always move to Saudi Arabia.</p>
<p>Take the latest brutal assault <a href="http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4774831/victorias-secret-worker-niqab-woman-acid-attack-wrecked-my-life.html">on Naomi Oni in London</a>. (Warning: Links lead to graphic photos.)</p>
<blockquote><p>Naomi, 20, was scarred for life and almost blinded by the attacker. The Victoria’s Secret worker suffered burns to her head, eyes, neck, chest, arms and legs. She said the attack had “destroyed” her life.</p>
<p>Naomi, who has undergone a series of skin grafts, is now scared to leave her house. She added: “I look in the mirror and it isn’t me. I’ll never look the same again.”</p>
<p>Determined to stay positive despite her injuries, she said things could have been much worse. &#8220;That person failed, whatever their aim was they failed. God has given me a life for a reason and that&#8217;s what keeps me going.&#8221;</p>
<p>Naomi was attacked after getting off a bus in Dagenham, East London, following a late shift at the Westfield Stratford branch of the lingerie store.</p>
<p>Naomi said: “I saw this Muslim woman wearing a niqab. I thought it was a bit strange to see her at that time of night, but she didn’t say anything and I kept on walking. Then I felt a splash on my face. It burned and I screamed out.</p>
<p>“I started running and screaming, holding my face. All the way home. I was screaming. I then banged on the door. I was hysterical. Luckily my godmother, who is a pharmacist, was at home with my mum and she helped me.</p>
<p>“She kept dipping my face in water and trying to calm me down. I was in shock, saying, ‘Who would do that? How could anyone do this’?”</p></blockquote>
<p>That&#8217;s an interesting question. Acid attacks are not uncommon in the Muslim world, often by men. While Noami says that her attacker was a woman, in a full body disguise it can be hard to tell.</p>
<p>Dagenham has a sizable Muslim population, along with all the usual tensions involved. So does Stratford. Islamist groups have been targeting ads and stores that they consider immoral, but it&#8217;s probably unlikely that Naomi was followed from work for the attack. But her clothing might have made her a target.</p>
<p>Muslim terrorism is, by definition, random. Its goal is to create public victims to intimidate others into falling in line. Acid attacks have been one means of enforcing Muslim &#8220;modesty&#8221; on women.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/muslim-in-niqab-carries-out-acid-attack-on-london-victorias-secret-employee/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Thumbs-Up for Gender Apartheid in Sweden</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/a-thumbs-up-for-gender-apartheid-in-sweden/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-thumbs-up-for-gender-apartheid-in-sweden</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/a-thumbs-up-for-gender-apartheid-in-sweden/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 04:14:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bruce Bawer]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender apartheid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niqab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[schools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sweden]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=119346</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Swedish authorities decide that the dehumanization of schoolgirls in class is totally fine. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/4596517.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-119367" title="4596517" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/4596517.gif" alt="" width="375" height="247" /></a></p>
<p>The other day I <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/01/10/norwegian-schools-preach-the-wonders-of-niqab/">wrote</a> about a young Muslim woman in Norway who wears a niqab – a veil that covers everything except the eyes – and who&#8217;s busy these days giving talks at Norwegian schools about her religion and her choice of outerwear.</p>
<p>Now, just across the border in Sweden, that country&#8217;s version of the Department of Education, which is called Skolverket (and which in English labels itself the Swedish National Agency for Education), has sent down a ruling about the role of niqab in Swedish schools.  This ruling is a response to new legislation as well as to a decision by Sweden&#8217;s Discrimination Ombudsman, which in turn came in response to a complaint by an adult student in Stockholm who cried prejudice a couple of years back when she was told to take off her niqab in class.</p>
<p>Skolverket&#8217;s decision, interestingly, has been represented by the Swedish media in different ways –  indeed, in two more or less antithetical ways.  On the one hand, <a href="http://dagbladet.se/nyheter/sundsvall/1.4279287--vi-fortsatter-att-respektera-religios-kladsel-%20"><em>Dagbladet</em></a><em> </em>begins its report as follows: “Students&#8217; right to wear veils in schools has long been a hot question.  Now Skolverket has ruled that full-covering veils may be forbidden in certain situations.” <em>Dagbladet </em>goes on to quote Skolverket&#8217;s guidelines to the effect that niqab can be banned in lab or shop classes, in which there may be safety issues, or when the niqab “significantly impedes the interaction between teachers and students.” Skolverket leaves it up to teachers to decide when there&#8217;s a problem.</p>
<p>But the Swedish edition of <a href="http://www.metro.se/nyheter/ja-till-heltackande-sloja-i-skolan/EVHlak!Qi0NDA75ZrUL/%20%20"><em>Metro</em></a> is (characteristically) more straightforward about what Skolverket&#8217;s ruling really amounts to.  “Skolverket approves full-covering veil,” reads the <em>Metro </em>headline.  “Only in exceptional cases can principals and teachers say no.” <em>Metro </em>notes that “the authorities cite religious freedom and believe it is up to the schools and teachers to adapt education to the students&#8217; needs.” The newspaper quotes from Skolverket&#8217;s guidelines: “The full-covering veil can impede contact and interaction between teachers and students, but Skolverket feels that these difficulties can be overcome in the great majority of cases.”</p>
<p>In short, the Swedish educational authorities have caved in.  Henceforth, niqab is permitted in Swedish schools.  If any teacher thinks it&#8217;s getting in the way of normal classroom interaction (and how could it <em>not?</em>) or that it represents a potential safety problem – well, it&#8217;s up to that teacher to say so and take the consequences.</p>
<p>Which, of course, is a full-scale cop-out on the part of the Swedish authorities.  What teacher in his or her right mind would dare to say “take off that niqab” in the wake of this ruling?  Skolverket has effectively left such teachers high and dry.  The minute any teacher dares to step into that minefield, Swedish Muslim “spokespeople” will come crashing down on them.  There&#8217;s no limit to how widespread the protests might be and how much mayhem they might lead to – just look, after all, at what happened after a Danish newspaper ran a few cartoons of Muhammed.  Can one imagine the Swedish educational bureaucrats – not to mention the politicians and national media – doing anything other than folding at once?  When Skolverket says it is leaving decisions to teachers, it is being cynical and cowardly, washing its hands of a difficult matter and passing it on to already put-upon people in essentially powerless, thankless positions.</p>
<p>The Swedish establishment has responded to Skolverket&#8217;s ruling with a predictable thumbs-up.  The Swedish People&#8217;s Party, for example, has <a href="http://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/pressroom/folkpartiet-stockholms-stadshus/pressrelease/view/vaelkommet-besked-fraan-skolverket-722709%20">greeted</a> its “welcome decision” with open arms.  So has one Daniel Nordström, who in an <a href="http://www.folkbladet.nu/281093/2012/01/12/det-ar-inte-latt-att-vara-larare/print/%20">opinion piece</a> in <em>Folkbladet </em>expresses sympathy for teachers who will now be put in the position of deciding when and when not to allow niqab – but who argues that a general ban is not the way to go either.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/a-thumbs-up-for-gender-apartheid-in-sweden/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Norwegian Schools Preach the Wonders of Niqab</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/norwegian-schools-preach-the-wonders-of-niqab/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=norwegian-schools-preach-the-wonders-of-niqab</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/norwegian-schools-preach-the-wonders-of-niqab/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 04:06:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bruce Bawer]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aisha Shezadi Kausar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hijab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niqab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Norway]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Schools]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=118635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A mysterious stealth Islamist emerges on the scene to promote keeping women out of sight and mind. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/niqab-veil.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-118647" title="niqab-veil" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/niqab-veil.gif" alt="" width="375" height="257" /></a></p>
<p>The <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/22/army-to-allow-hijabs-turbans-in-junior-rotc/%20">news</a> came three days before Christmas:</p>
<blockquote><p>The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has announced that the Department of Defense will now allow Muslim and Sikh students participating in Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) to wear headscarves and turbans while in uniform.</p></blockquote>
<p>When I read this, the first thing I thought was: <em>What?!  </em>And the second was: Since when does CAIR make announcements on behalf of the Department of Defense?</p>
<p>The background was as follows: a Muslim girl in Tennessee was told by her JROTC commanding officer that she could not wear her headscarf, or hijab, in a homecoming parade.  She contacted CAIR, which in turn contacted Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, asking for a change in policy.  And instead of informing CAIR that the Department of Defense does not take its marching orders from fronts for terrorist organizations, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army Larry Stubblefield fell right into line, writing a letter to CAIR assuring that henceforth JROTC policy would be different.</p>
<p>France and the Netherlands have banned the niqab, the face-covering veil, in public; the hijab is also prohibited in certain venues (such as classrooms and government offices) in a few European jurisdictions.  But in most of the Western world, there are no laws against any Muslim garments.  In many Western cities, there has been a visible increase in the number of women wearing these things in public.  And there has also been an increase in the number of Muslims who demand their right to wear them in institutions ranging from the armed forces and police to schools and universities.</p>
<p>Case in point: a twenty-year-old woman named Aisha Shezadi Kausar.  Kausar wears niqab.  Last year her name appeared on an essay, “You, Me, and Niqab,” which was included in <em>Utilslørt (Uncovered), </em>a collection of essays by and about Muslim women.  On December 20, she was featured in a <a href="http://www.nrk.no/nett-tv/indeks/291229/">news report</a> on Norwegian public television (NRK) about a nationwide project aimed at Norwegian children and teenagers. Kausar, NRK reported, is making personal appearances at various schools around Norway, where she presents her use of the niqab as a feminist choice.  In the report, she was seen in front of an auditorium full of students, first praying, then talking about Allah, and then making her case.  She&#8217;s engaged in a “struggle for freedom” and “fighting against xenophobia.” The only reasons for opposition to niqab are “prejudice” and “fear of foreigners.” At the end of her talk the students gave her a big round of applause, and the kids interviewed by NRK said all the “right” things about diversity and tolerance.  Plainly they had not learned anything about Islam, the place of women in Islam, or what niqab actually represents.  Their teachers had taken them away from their studies to be propagandized.</p>
<p>Who&#8217;s sponsoring this promotional campaign for symbols of female submission and subordination?  The Muslim Students&#8217; Association?  The Norwegian Islamic Council?  No: the <a href="http://nffo.no/eng/default.aspx">Norwegian Non-Fiction Writers and Translators Organisation</a> (NFF) and a group called <a href="http://www.foreningenles.no/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=88&amp;Itemid=87">Foreningen !les</a> (the exclamation point and the small “l” are part of the name) whose official goal is to promote reading and literature.  The premise of this sponsorship is that Kausar (the author, as far as I can determine, of exactly one essay) is an author and that they are sending her around to talk about her work.</p>
<p>In other words, Norwegian schools are setting aside time to allow their students to be fed pretty lies about Islam and niqab – and the country&#8217;s major organization for writers and translators is helping to foot the bill.</p>
<p>(If I were still an NFF member, I&#8217;d quit in protest.  Alas, I already quit in protest years ago over something else.)</p>
<p>Who is Aisha Shezadi Kausar?  Pretty much the only things I could find about her online were articles about hijab and niqab.  The author of a May 2009 <a href="http://www.nettavis.net/art.php?cat=17&amp;id=1587">article</a> on Nettavis, entitled “A hijab – is it really worth making so much of a fuss about?”, interviewed Kausar, then nineteen years old.  At the time, according to the article, Kausar was not a wearer of hijab.  Nettavis, which is a news website for young people, quoted Kausar:</p>
<p>“It speaks for itself that it&#8217;s wrong that my belief should put a stop to my career choice.  After all, we have religious freedom in this country,” she says with a certain bitterness in her voice.</p>
<p>A little over a year later, in August 2010, the newspaper <em>VG</em> ran an <a href="http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10001288">interview</a> with Kausar<em>. </em>Though in the May 2009 article she had been represented as a Muslim girl who chose not to wear hijab, in the August 2010 <em>VG </em>interview she was described as a wearer of hijab and was quoted as saying she had begun wearing it three years earlier.  She said that her motivation for doing so was, in large part, “[t]o show the Islamophobes that Muslim girls can choose.” She insisted, moreover, that nobody had pressured her to wear hijab. On the contrary, she called herself a “feminist in a religious head covering” and said that she “identifies with the tough Muslim ladies who have fought for women in hijab to be accepted.”</p>
<p>And now, just over a year later, here she is wearing and promoting the niqab.   And she&#8217;s still presenting herself as a feminist, a believer in freedom and diversity, and as somebody who, aside from her faith and her fashion choices, is not really all that different from the young people whom she addresses in Norwegian schools.</p>
<p>In addition to the Nettavis and <em>VG </em>articles, I did find Kausar&#8217;s Facebook and Twitter pages.  Judge for yourself.  On her <a href="https://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100002953350954">Facebook</a> page, under “People who inspire Aisha,” there&#8217;s precisely one name – the Prophet Muhammed.  Her favorite books?  The Koran, Hadith, and Sunnah.  Under “Favorite Movies” there&#8217;s a single entry, “Bollywood is Haram,” which is not the title of a movie but a statement, meaning of course that Bollywood films are against Islamic law.  If you click on “Bollywood is Haram” on Kausar&#8217;s Facebook page, it&#8217;ll take you to another <a href="https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002953350954#!/pages/Bollywood-er-Haram/241960342493562">Facebook page</a> entitled “Bollywood is Haram,” at which you can read this explanation of the page by whoever set it up: “Bollywood is haram, people. We have to work against this beast that is spreading itself through our homes.  The filthy half-naked hags who dance on the TVs in our living rooms must be removed forever!”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/norwegian-schools-preach-the-wonders-of-niqab/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Canada&#8217;s Ringing &#8216;No&#8217; to the Niqab</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/stephenbrown/canadas-ringing-no-to-the-niqab/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=canadas-ringing-no-to-the-niqab</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/stephenbrown/canadas-ringing-no-to-the-niqab/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 04:28:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stephen Brown]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ceremonies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[citizenship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niqab]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=115801</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Our northern neighbor bans Muslim women from wearing face coverings at citizenship ceremonies.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/niqab4.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-115806" title="niqab4" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/niqab4.jpg" alt="" width="420" height="280" /></a></p>
<p>The Canadian government of Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper showed new immigrants that Canadian and Western values are paramount in Canada on Monday when it <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/12/12/niqabs-burkas-must-be-removed-during-citizenship-ceremonies-jason-kenney/" target="_blank">banned</a> face coverings for Muslim women at citizenship swearing-in ceremonies. The prohibition occurred after the country’s immigration minister, Jason Kenney, had received complaints from citizenship judges and other ceremony participants that it is “hard to tell whether veiled individuals are actually reciting the oath.</p>
<p>“Allowing a group to hide their faces while they are becoming members of our community is counter to Canada’s commitment to openness, equality and social cohesion,” Kenney <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/12/12/niqabs-burkas-must-be-removed-during-citizenship-ceremonies-jason-kenney/" target="_blank">stated</a>.</p>
<p>The wearing of the Muslim face-veil was becoming a growing problem at citizenship ceremonies. Government officials across the country were being confronted <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/12/12/niqabs-burkas-must-be-removed-during-citizenship-ceremonies-jason-kenney/" target="_blank">“every week”</a> with veil-wearing women. This went against the grain of the government’s belief that taking the citizenship oath, according to Kenney, was “a public declaration that you are joining the Canadian family and it must be taken freely and openly.” In fact, Kenney called it “frankly bizarre” that regulations had allowed for face coverings at the ceremonies in the first place.</p>
<p>&#8220;We cannot have two classes of citizenship ceremonies,” the immigration minister <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/12/12/niqabs-burkas-must-be-removed-during-citizenship-ceremonies-jason-kenney/" target="_blank">maintained</a>. “Canadian citizenship is not just about the right to carry a passport and to vote.”</p>
<p>Canada is already wrestling with the veil-wearing issue in its Supreme Court, the country’s highest judicial body. An unidentified Muslim woman, a sexual assault victim, is currently seeking the right to wear a veil when she testifies at the trial of her two accused. The outcome of this trial has far-reaching implications for the Canadian legal system as a finding in her favour could introduce a special status or two-tier system that Keeny feared for trial participants: Muslim women who would be allowed conceal their faces and non-Muslim women who wouldn’t.</p>
<p>But as Barbara Kay, a columnist for the <em>National Post</em>, a Canadian national newspaper, <a href="http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/12/12/barbara-kay-new-niqab-law-puts-canadian-values-first/" target="_blank">points out</a>, this case is not really about religion. The woman, for example, had not worn a veil when she had her photo taken for her driver’s license. Which indicates the case really concerns the unfortunate victim’s “unwillingness to face her abusers without the psychological protection of the veil.”</p>
<p>Besides, as Kay <a href="http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/12/12/barbara-kay-new-niqab-law-puts-canadian-values-first/" target="_blank">states</a>, the veil is not a religious “demand” in Islam. She cites the grand Shiekh of al-Azhar University in Egypt, Islam’s most prestigious university, who, in 2009, “scolded a Cairo high school girl for wearing a face-veil: ‘The niqab is tradition,” he said, ‘It has no connection to religion.’ ”</p>
<p>After Monday&#8217;s announcement, Muslim women who show up with a covered face at citizenship ceremonies will be warned twice to uncover. If they refuse to do so, they will not be allowed to take the oath and their status in Canada will remain as “permanent resident,” which does not give them the right to vote or hold certain jobs. That, however, may be a good thing from Canadian society’s point of view. Veil-wearing women are usually associated with radical Islamic religious beliefs that include the destruction of liberal democracies and their replacement with theocracies based on sharia law.</p>
<p>This is the view in France, which treats veiled Muslim women much more strictly than Canada. A French judicial body, for example, <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1034412/Veiled-Muslim-woman-denied-French-citizenship-amid-concerns-radical-religious-views.html" target="_blank">denied citizenship</a> outright in 2008 to a burqa-wearing Moroccan woman for “insufficient integration.” In 2010, France’s legislative bodies <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ban_on_face_covering" target="_blank">passed</a> a law against covering one’s face in public spaces, which included the Muslim veil and burqa. The law went into effect last April, and the first two Muslim women <a href="http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/09/22/french-court-issues-fines-first-women-for-full-face-veils/" target="_blank">were fined</a> by a French police court for non-compliance in September.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/stephenbrown/canadas-ringing-no-to-the-niqab/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>53</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>When in Dubai: The Kardashians Shop for Burqas</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/mark-tapson/when-in-dubai-the-kardashians-shop-for-burqas/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=when-in-dubai-the-kardashians-shop-for-burqas</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/mark-tapson/when-in-dubai-the-kardashians-shop-for-burqas/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2011 04:15:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Tapson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[burqa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dubai]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kim Kardashian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kris Jenner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niqab]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=109238</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The oppression of women just got a big fashion boost.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/burqa.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-109241" title="burqa" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/burqa.jpg" alt="" width="400" height="402" /></a></p>
<p>In Dubai last week to open a milkshake franchise, promote her signature fragrance, and pursue other opportunities to expand her business empire, <em>uber</em>-celebrity Kim Kardashian and mother Kris Jenner stopped by the Dubai Mall to shop for the latest Middle Eastern fashions – including matching <em>burqas</em>.</p>
<p>“That&#8217;s me!” Kardashian later <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/KimKardashian">squealed on Twitter</a> beneath a photo of herself with her famous face completely obscured except for a slit for the eyes (this is actually a <em>niqab</em>, , which covers everything; a <em>burqa</em> is becoming the popular catchall word to describe the covering in general). Considering that Kardashian’s fame is entirely the result of the relentless marketing of her curvy sexuality, beginning with a sex tape, a <em>burqa</em> – the purpose of which is to obliterate female sexuality and to reduce a woman’s identity to a rumpled, repellent blob – is a curious fashion choice.</p>
<p>And a disappointing one. One of the most famous women in the world and a style icon for countless millions of fans, Kim Kardashian may have just given the <em>burqa</em> her considerably influential fashion imprimatur.</p>
<p>It’s easy to pick on celebrities like Kardashian. Reveling in the narcissistic bubble of her inexplicable fame, far removed from the harsh realities of countless Muslim women literally enshrouded in this enforced anonymity, she is, in all fairness, no doubt simply ignorant of the cultural ramifications of her flippant shopping selection.</p>
<p>What’s really disturbing here is that the <em>media</em> treated the whole incident so breezily. “Kim Kardashian&#8217;s latest fashion statement? A burqa!” was <a href="http://www.usmagazine.com/celebritynews/news/kim-kardashian-kris-jenner-wear-burqas-in-dubai-20111410">the typical headline</a>. “Kim Kardashian Rocks a Burqa in Dubai,” <a href="http://www.bet.com/news/fashion-and-beauty/2011/10/14/kim-kardashian-rocks-a-burqa-in-dubai.html">read another</a>. A third: “<a href="http://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/articles/844435/kim-kardashian-goes-burqua-shopping">Kim Kardashian can even make a burqa look hot</a>.” <em>Ad nauseum</em>.</p>
<p>Not a single news item about this paparazzi moment referenced the impropriety of these two wealthy Western women donning garments that have been designed to enslave women and punish them for the uncontrollable lust they inspire in men by a hint of skin or a glimpse of lips. Every media report I saw opted for innocuous phrasing like describing the <em>burqa</em> as “traditional” for Muslim women. BET went with the even more blandly neutral “<a href="http://www.bet.com/news/fashion-and-beauty/2011/10/14/kim-kardashian-rocks-a-burqa-in-dubai.html">regional dress</a>.” The UK’s <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2048980/Kim-Kardashian-keeps-curves-covered-burka-Dubai.html#ixzz1apA174MO">DailyMail</a> got slightly more specific by pointing out that it is “the conservative dress preferred in the religious country.” <em><a href="http://www.usmagazine.com/celebritynews/news/kim-kardashian-kris-jenner-wear-burqas-in-dubai-20111410">US Weekly</a></em> edged slightly closer to the truth by giving the <em>burqa</em> the understated label, “often controversial.”</p>
<p>None of the mainstream media reports dared to storm the ramparts of multiculturalism or to provoke shrill accusations of the dreaded and mythical Islamophobia by pointing out <em>why</em> it’s controversial. None of the media outlets broached the ugly subject of the misogyny that underlies this “regional dress,” much less mentioned that women have been killed for <em>not</em> wearing the “traditional” garb that Kim Kardashian and her mom had so much fun modeling.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/mark-tapson/when-in-dubai-the-kardashians-shop-for-burqas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>30</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>French Canada vs. Sharia</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/christine-williams/french-canada-vs-sharia/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=french-canada-vs-sharia</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/christine-williams/french-canada-vs-sharia/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 04:01:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Christine Williams]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Angus Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[angus reid poll]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[assault trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[body language]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[critical factor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[God]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[muslim women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niqab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quebec]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religious laws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saudi Arabia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sensitive issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tarek Fatah]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thorny issue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Toronto]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[veil]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=60934</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Quebec courageously introduces a bill that says no to the niqab. Will other Canadian provinces follow?]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/niqab.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-60938" title="niqab" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/niqab.jpg" alt="" width="400" height="261" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Visit <a href="http://www.newsrealblog.com/">Newsreal</a></strong></p>
<p>Multiculturalism is threatening to ruin Canada by purporting that all cultures are equal.  How this definition reconciles those cultures that practice and affirm Sharia Law with that of our democratic system of human rights is beyond reason.</p>
<p>The niqab is a sticky point in Canada.  It is the ultimate symbol of female oppression.  It also denies the rest of society the right to see what could be hidden under that garb, translating into potential safety and security issues.  As for the importance of body language, it is the primary way we communicate and a critical factor in law enforcement and in our courts.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/580790" target="_blank">Last year in Ontario:</a></p>
<blockquote><p>A judge has ordered a Toronto woman to testify without her niqab at a sexual assault trial – raising the thorny issue of whether Muslim women should be allowed to appear as witnesses wearing a veil that covers everything but the eyes.</p>
<p>A relative of the woman said it’s distressing the judge has exceeded his “jurisdiction and ventured into the interpretation of religious laws concerning the veil, not to mention the fact that … (she) has observed the veil for many years in accordance with her” beliefs.</p></blockquote>
<p>Full Story <a href="http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/580790" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p>Though a sensitive issue and any fair thinking person can sympathize with the pain of this victim, her relative needs to wake up and realize that she is not in a country governed by Sharia.  Witnesses are routinely scrutinized and body language is revealing.</p>
<p>So now, sparks are flying in Quebec over the niqab.  Traditionally Liberal Quebec has ironically introduced Bill 94 which requires people to show their faces in order to receive government services, for reasons of identification, security and communication.</p>
<p>There is nothing unreasonable about this.  In fact 95 percent of Quebecers support the bill according to an Angus Reid poll, while 80% of Canada as a whole supports it, yet there are those radically opposed to the bill, branding it as discriminatory and even racist.  In fact, a day of Action was even planned by the Non/No Bill 94 Coalition Press, comprised largely of far left feminists.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<blockquote><p>Day of Action on May 18 that will demonstrate national opposition to Bill 94, the sweeping legislation proposed in Quebec that would deny government services to people who wear face coverings such as the niqab (or face veil) worn by some Muslim women, and to demand that this legislation be immediately withdrawn.   The Non/No Bill 94 Coalition Press Release</p></blockquote>
<p>For a list of supporters for the subjugation of women through the niqab click <a href="http://nonbill94.wordpress.com/about/" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p>These feminists have a twisted understanding of what human rights means. They are supporting the subjugation of women under the multicultural pretext, disregarding the relentless warnings from moderate Muslims who accurately understand what enslavement means.  While these feminists continue to fiercely oppose Western women who embrace their femininity–and even scoff at the choice to stay home and raise children–they fight for the &#8220;rights&#8221; of Muslim women to be stripped of their personhood.  Moderate Muslims rail against the niqab:</p>
<blockquote><p>There is no requirement in Islam for Muslim women to cover their face. Rather, the practice reflects a mode of male control over women. Its association with Islam originates in Saudi Arabia, which seeks to export the practice of veiling — along with other elements of its extremist Wahhabist brand of Islam.</p>
<p>If readers have any doubt about this issue, they should take a look at the holiest place for Muslims — the grand mosque in Mecca. For over 1,400 years, Muslim men and women have prayed in what we believe is the House of God. And for all these centuries, female visitors have been explicitly prohibited from covering their faces.  (Tarek Fatah, National Post)</p></blockquote>
<p>How about if  the husbands or boyfriends of these radical feminists shoved them under a black burka, even in scorching summer heat?  Another missed factor by these misguided feminist cads:  physical abuse can be easily hidden under masses of black cloth.</p>
<p>This insanity is driven and propelled by special interests bent on stirring up trouble.  Salam Elmenyawi, head of the Muslim Council of Montreal  called Bill 94 “very troubling and serious” since the government has allegedly tailored legislation that “points a finger” at the Muslim community.</p>
<blockquote><p>He predicted that if the bill becomes law, it will be challenged as an infringement of the freedom of religion guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  (National Post)</p></blockquote>
<p>Canada continues to be torn apart under a multicultural banner, cheered on by Leftist ideologues and agenda driven fundamentalists. The forces of Islamism are insidious and determined. Bill 94 represents a critical positive step that hopefully other Canadian provinces will follow.</p>
<p><strong>Christine Williams is the producer and host of the Canadian National Talk show <em>On the Line</em> on CTS TV, which has been recipient of 6 International Awards. To read Jamie Glazov’s interview with her at Frontpage, <a href="../2010/04/27/rejecting-the-left/">click here</a>. She can be reached at <a href="mailto:ChristineBWilliams23@gmail.com" target="_blank">ChristineBWilliams23@gmail.com.</a></strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/christine-williams/french-canada-vs-sharia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>26</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Buried Alive In Turkey—and Under the Burqa</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/phyllis-chesler/buried-alive-in-turkey%e2%80%94and-under-the-burqa/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=buried-alive-in-turkey%25e2%2580%2594and-under-the-burqa</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/phyllis-chesler/buried-alive-in-turkey%e2%80%94and-under-the-burqa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 05:01:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Phyllis Chesler]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atrocity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[burqa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consequence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[country]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[earth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[european union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[europeans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[everything]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[face masks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[father]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ghost]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[girl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grandfather]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Imams]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ireland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[islamic veil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[logical consequence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[member]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Memi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[muslim women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niqab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nothing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obstacle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[old girl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pajamas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal freedoms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Savage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shrouds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[turkey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[veil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[visit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[week]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=49175</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Turkey, a father and grandfather bury Medine Memi, a sixteen-year-old girl, alive.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/buried.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-49180" title="buried" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/buried-300x212.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="212" /></a></p>
<p><strong>Visit <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/">Pajamas</a></strong></p>
<p>In Turkey—a country which was nearly accepted as a member by the European Union—a father and grandfather recently <a href="http://www.montrealgazette.com/Girl+buried+alive+honour+killing+Turkey+Report/2521342/story.html">buried Medine Memi, a sixteen-year-old girl, alive</a>—and all because she was seen talking to boys. Medine was repeatedly beaten. The police did not help her. When the men buried her she was “alive and fully conscious.”</p>
<p>This savage, heartless, primitive act is the ultimate, logical consequence of burying women alive—shrouding them–while they still roam the earth. One becomes claustrophobic under the burqa, until one gets used to being seen as a ghost, invisible, non-human, dead.</p>
<p>All this past week, I received news of this atrocity in Turkey. I refrained from writing about it. What can one say? There is nothing to say. There is everything to do. No one is doing anything.</p>
<p>But, all over Europe, they are fighting about the Islamic Veil. Should burqas (full body shrouds) and niqab (face masks) be banned? Should hijab remain banned in school in France? <a href="http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0206/1224263887684.html">The Council of Imams in Ireland has just had a press conference</a>. It said that “a ban on the niqab – a veil worn by Muslim women that covers everything except the eyes – violates personal freedoms guaranteed by democratic systems. It added that such bans also constitute an obstacle to multiculturalism, integration and human rights.”</p>
<p>Well—that ought to shame the Europeans.</p>
<p><strong>To continue reading this article, <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2010/02/06/buried-alive-in-turkey%E2%80%94and-under-the-burqa/">click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/phyllis-chesler/buried-alive-in-turkey%e2%80%94and-under-the-burqa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>France denies citizenship to man with veiled wife &#8211; AP</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/france-denies-citizenship-to-man-with-veiled-wife-ap/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=france-denies-citizenship-to-man-with-veiled-wife-ap</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/france-denies-citizenship-to-man-with-veiled-wife-ap/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 17:31:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacob Laksin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[age]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[amp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apos s]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ban]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[citizenship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[community]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Equality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[extremism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[french authorities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[french wife]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gateway]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gender equality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[globalization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intolerance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law and order]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[man]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[move]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[muslim community]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[muslim veils]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national values]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nicolas Sarkozy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niqab]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Nicolas Sarkozy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proponent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public debate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secularism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[veil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vocal proponent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wife]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=48827</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[PARIS – French authorities have denied citizenship to a man who forced his French wife to wear a face-covering veil, saying he had rejected national values of secularism and gender equality.The government has been speaking out strongly against head-to-toe veils, and is moving toward banning them in public after a long public debate over French [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100204/ap_on_re_eu/eu_france_muslim_veil;_ylt=AtBeV913E9H163nydCA8VGis0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNwOHVvZ3E1BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwMjA0L2V1X2ZyYW5jZV9tdXNsaW1fdmVpbARjY29kZQNtb3N0cG9wdWxhcgRjcG9zAzUEcG9zAzIEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHNlYwN5bl9oZWFkbGluZV9saXN0BHNsawNmcmFuY2VkZW5pZXM-"><img src='http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/capt.fbeabdd102954317a0a46e40e14e28f5.france_muslim_veil_par113.jpg' alt='' /></a></p>
<p>PARIS – French authorities have denied citizenship to a man who forced his French wife to wear a face-covering veil, saying he had rejected national values of secularism and gender equality.The government has been speaking out strongly against head-to-toe veils, and is moving toward banning them in public after a long public debate over French national identity in the age of globalization.Critics call the face-covering veil a gateway to extremism, but the move to ban it has drawn fierce criticism from some of France&amp;apos;s five million Muslims, who say such restrictions are based in fear and intolerance of Islam.President Nicolas Sarkozy has called the veils degrading to women and unwelcome in France. Sarkozy, a law-and-order conservative whose relations with the Muslim community have often been fraught, has been a vocal proponent of an all-out ban on the burqa, niqab and other face-covering Muslim veils.</p>
<p>via <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100204/ap_on_re_eu/eu_france_muslim_veil;_ylt=AtBeV913E9H163nydCA8VGis0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNwOHVvZ3E1BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwMjA0L2V1X2ZyYW5jZV9tdXNsaW1fdmVpbARjY29kZQNtb3N0cG9wdWxhcgRjcG9zAzUEcG9zAzIEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHNlYwN5bl9oZWFkbGluZV9saXN0BHNsawNmcmFuY2VkZW5pZXM-">France denies citizenship to man with veiled wife &#8211; Yahoo! News</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/jlaksin/france-denies-citizenship-to-man-with-veiled-wife-ap/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 1050/1118 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 13:16:49 by W3 Total Cache -->