Is it acceptable for non Muslims to wear burkas?

[L00b]

But the ones that want to wear the burka will NOT be free to do so.

Boo-f-hoo. Someone sue the Gvt. Oh wait, someone did. Before the ECHR no less. And lost.

So the government has "freed" some women, at the price of oppressing others.

Can't please all the people all the time, so try and please most of them most of the time (Gvt Studies 101, lesson 1).

 

You're going around in circles a bit, Cyclone. I thought we'd agreed to go our separate ways, me along my 'fascist' way and you along your free-for-all way?

Slow hand clap for that.

Bothered? 4.7m (give or take a few) seemingly say 'not'.

 

Now, what about the last portion of my post, which you seemingly ignored?

Edited November 5, 2014 by L00b

[monkey104]

Question, Those who were arrested during the process, were they also charged with failing to adhere to the mask ban also?

 

As for repeating yourself ,Jesus H Christ you should be sat where I am.

 

NOW nice attempt at deflection, answer the question, would the general public be allowed to decide to cover their faces enmasse?

 

Remember! 'Two legs bad, four legs good'.

[mjw47]

There is no law against concealing your face. You are talking rubbish. Concealing your face is not obstruction of the police, it is not a crime.

 

You keep making up rubbish to try to support the earlier rubbish that you've asserted.

 

Whilst legislation CAN be enacted. If it HASN'T been enacted, then it's NOT A CRIME. That's how it works. You can't make up a future crime on the basis that legislation MIGHT be enacted.

 

---------- Post added 05-11-2014 at 11:14 ----------

 

[/color

 

You are apparently incapable of logical thought and using commonsense.

 

My point is this.

 

I KNOW it HASN'T been enacted.

 

I am saying that anyone who possesses the slightest modicum of intelligence ( which quite obviously excludes you )will understand that IF the general public were to decide that they would all go out in public wearing face masks it WOULD THEN, at that stage be made illegal.

 

I have explained several times WHY that would happen.

 

And that is what makes the current acceptance of the burka discriminatory.

 

It is allowed to a minority but would not be allowed for the majority.

 

No amount of you bleating on and on about 'it's not illegal now, you could wear one, blah blah blah' will alter that fact.

 

Unless of course you truly believe that the government,police and security forces would be quite happy with the whole country walking about in disguise, except if they go shopping at Bluewater where different rules apply.

[Cyclone]

On the contrary, you keep claiming that you are not free to wear a burka. When you, and everyone else, knows that you are.

 

It IS allowed for everyone. You keep denying this, despite it being a self evident fact. No amount of you denying this reality will alter it. You ARE free to wear one. We all are.

 

You'll find that the government rules in the UK on behalf of the populace, not despite them.

[johncocker]

anybody been through the airport in saudi?

Saudi Arabia gives this warning to incoming women travellers:

‘Women and under-aged children should be accompanied by a Mohram (close male family member), unless they have prior authorisation. Unaccompanied women must be met at the airport by their sponsor or husband and have confirmed onward reservations as far as their final destination in Saudi Arabia. If met by a sponsor, it is worth noting that there are restrictions on women travelling by car with men who are not related by blood or marriage (women are not permitted to drive).’

And here in britain men and women are rabidly advocating that the culture and religion that gave rise to such human rights abuses against women; so dire that women must wear bags over their heads when in public, must hold sway here:huh:

 

 

Not only are women made invisible in the public sphere, but also their whole existence as emotional beings is denied by the male constructed belief /culture/sect/legal systems of fundamental Islamists that require a woman’s humanity to be obliterated under a burka. This is not about religion or culture; the issue is basic human rights for women, which have been denied by the barbaric edicts of men to satiate their neurotic psychotic urges for power and control.

[monkey104]

You are apparently incapable of logical thought and using commonsense.

 

My point is this.

 

I KNOW it HASN'T been enacted.

 

I am saying that anyone who possesses the slightest modicum of intelligence ( which quite obviously excludes you )will understand that IF the general public were to decide that they would all go out in public wearing face masks it WOULD THEN, at that stage be made illegal.

 

I have explained several times WHY that would happen.

 

And that is what makes the current acceptance of the burka discriminatory.

 

It is allowed to a minority but would not be allowed for the majority.

 

No amount of you bleating on and on about 'it's not illegal now, you could wear one, blah blah blah' will alter that fact.

 

Unless of course you truly believe that the government,police and security forces would be quite happy with the whole country walking about in disguise, except if they go shopping at Bluewater where different rules apply.

 

What utter claptrap.

If 64 million people in the Uk decided to wear face covering, you say a law will be enacted to make it illegal.

I bet the 140,000 police officers in the UK would be laughing their cobblers off at that one.

Edited November 5, 2014 by monkey104

[Cyclone]

anybody been through the airport in saudi?

Saudi Arabia gives this warning to incoming women travellers:

‘Women and under-aged children should be accompanied by a Mohram (close male family member), unless they have prior authorisation. Unaccompanied women must be met at the airport by their sponsor or husband and have confirmed onward reservations as far as their final destination in Saudi Arabia. If met by a sponsor, it is worth noting that there are restrictions on women travelling by car with men who are not related by blood or marriage (women are not permitted to drive).’

And here in britain men and women are rabidly advocating that the culture and religion that gave rise to such human rights abuses against women; so dire that women must wear bags over their heads when in public, must hold sway here:huh:

No they aren't.

 

People are arguing that the culture here allows people the freedom to choose what to wear. And that includes the burka if they wish.

[Jim Hardie]

I detest the burka but I believe that the majority of wearers do so of their own free will. Let them get on with it. If they want to be doormats then that's their lookout.

I can't see any chance of legislation against it either. Not in a country that surrendered the principle of equality under the law many years ago.

Fred Hill served 31 terms of imprisonment in protest.

Sorry, can't make the link work. Google 'who was Fred Hill'.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Jim Hardie

[boyfriday]

Seriously? Are you incapable of seeing the complete nonsense in what you are saying?

 

Once again for the hard of understanding.

 

This country has the most comprehensive CCTV system in the world, it is used extensively by the Police and Security services to deal with crime and terrorism.

That might be the case but there's no compunction on the general public to make themselves identifiable to CCTV cameras

In your post at 396 you stated that the 'one camera for every eleven people' was a myth, you were wrong, it's a fact.

 

This shows you do not fully understand what you are on about.

 

Simple easy question for you.

 

Given the current use of CCTV, and the Governments continued multi Billion spend on these systems, do you believe that they would accept millions of the general public suddenly deciding to walk about wearing a full face disguise?

 

A simple yes or no will suffice.

 

And yes, you definitely are missing something. You appear to be suffering under the illusion that the laws of this country are set in stone, and cannot be amended abolished or added to.

 

A temporary anti mask legislation was brought in in 2011 to be applied during the UK anti austerity protests.

 

The government can enact just about any legislation that it wants to.

 

So, yes or no?

 

I think I can safely say that by the time millions of people are walking around wearing burkas on British streets that we'll have bigger problems to worry about than identifying them.

[mjw47]

On the contrary, you keep claiming that you are not free to wear a burka. When you, and everyone else, knows that you are.

 

It IS allowed for everyone. You keep denying this, despite it being a self evident fact. No amount of you denying this reality will alter it. You ARE free to wear one. We all are.

 

You'll find that the government rules in the UK on behalf of the populace, not despite them.

 

Firstly, where have I said that I wouldn't be free to wear a burka? Please show me.

 

I have said that if everyone was to decide to wear one then we wouldn't be allowed, I haven't said I or anyone else couldn't wear one now, there's a significant difference, and you seem unable to grasp it.

 

Your final sentence is one of the most asinine statements that I have ever had the amusement to read.

 

No Government rules on popular public feelings, they rule on what they believe is in the countries best interest, that does not always accord with the populations wishes.

 

If they wanted to do that then they would have constant referendums wouldn't they?

 

We would probably bring back hanging and reduce the extortionate taxes on alcohol, cigarettes and fuel and also stop getting involved in wars if they were to take any notice of the public.

 

How old are you,and where the hell have you been?

 

'Rule on behalf of the populace' :hihi:

 

---------- Post added 05-11-2014 at 14:58 ----------

 

What utter claptrap.

If 64 million people in the Uk decided to wear face covering, you say a law will be enacted to make it illegal.

I bet the 140,000 police officers in the UK would be laughing their cobblers off at that one.

 

For 33 years I worked in the electronic security industry, and for 28 of those years I worked in weekly, sometimes daily contact with the police.

 

I'm still in contact with a number of them who are friends of mine.

 

Maybe I have a reasonable idea as to what they find amusing.

 

Still not answered the question have you, evasive little tinker aren't you?

 

There are now two questions outstanding and you have ducked them both.

 

1, Given the billions invested in and the reliance upon CCTV systems in this country do you believe that the Government would allow it to be made redundant by everyone covering their faces?

 

2, Were people arrested in the 2011 anti austerity riots charged with failing to adhere to the mask ban in addition to any other charges?

 

A yes or no answer to both would be appreciated.