Burka ban

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 28206
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Once we culturally brainwash them, you mean?

I don't believe in immigration that enshrines a viewpoint (as expoused by multiculturalism) that you don't have to acommodate or accept the general rules of culture of a country you move to or indeed the country you're born in.

I am all for integration. I am for multi culturalism provided the cultures are not diametrically opposed to our own or provided they are not seeking to change cultural values of liberty, sexual equality and human rights that are among the more laudable byproducts of the English psyche.

It can be considered not politically correct to be against multiculturalism. I'm not totally against it, just partially.
 
Last edited:

upto them if they want to wear them, they should have to remove them for banks, security check type things, but how they can be banned seems beyond me ?
They are an item of clothing just the same as those jackets with the mask and goggles are, and I know which I find the more threatening.

*patents Halal snorkel parka, limited edition signature ones available with signature of Mullah Omar, oh no sorry thats the cardies, the parkas are Abu Hamza endorsed.
 
Although i'm pretty sure he's talking mnore about the western world bringing democracy to Iraq and such like.

That's actually an example of how westerners adhere to the law and how the law of Dubai retained its independence, because they were arrested, sentenced and released without interference from the west.

If the couple had done it and got away with it because they were westerners, then that would be a relevant example.

As for democracy, that's a system of government. It's not a "way of life" as such, it's a political ideology. And ideology changes in the middle east has come from "bottom up" by the people themselves, not "top down".

Iraq wasn't an attack on Islam, but an ill-judged attempt to remove a dictator and ensure another one didn't rise in place. That said, the Iraqi's have always been able to judge how they move forward. George Bush did a terrible job, but "Americanising" Iraq was never the aim.

Libya, Egypt and Tunisia were all "people's revolutions" and not influenced by the west. NATO etc. interfered in Libya to prevent a humanitarian crisis and a massacre.

Afghanistan was a counter-attack by the USA to the Taliban and was pretty much a war against an enemy; the fact it was an Islamic state was almost incidental.

North Korea is a militant, isolationist state ran by a dictator and regularly threaten regional neighbours, so they are constantly watched and warned.

China are communist but have basically a free market, and any revolution (if ever) would be people based.

Russia is a "democracy."

I don't know if I've left anywhere out, but there isn't an instance when the west have gone into a foreign land to replace and enforce our way of life on them.
 
Where then? Give me an example.

Okay, I could start with the empires, that would be the obvious place to start. You said the last two hundred years so that covers the peak of the british Raj, of the interference in the far east and of Imperial africa.

Then there would be christian missionaries, they still exist and again the last two hundred years covers arguably their peak. Charity workers could be construed in the same manner, in particular the ones educating about condoms and the like in aids ridden countries or giving advie on irrigation.

Then you've got to talk about the industries, the mcdonalds in istanbul, the workers in bangladesh being taught english so they can do call centres, the africans being given free nestle milk so they don't breat feeed and then can be charged more for mik later (despite their culturally being a strong taboo against not breast feeding), the way Japan's isolationist government was toppled by the american navy to secure trade. The market forces are doing a lot to westernise the world because the industry leaders are often western. Sweatshop kids being given free nike tops and such like.

Then there's crime and the drug trade and the way western drugs and alcohol are exported to non western societes (american indians and aborginies for instance).

Then there's military force, and governments like Allende's or Hussien's overthrown by western governments because they were leading those countries in a path we didn't approve of. That's the defeniton of interfering with their laws.

There's enviromentalism and the numerous times it has tried to stop other cultures from hunting animals when it's built into their values. The trade for stuuf like ivory and chinese medicals is a long standing part of various cultures as is whale hunting.

There's the campagin against slavery (part of the culture of a lot of societies, though it sometimes can be only traced back to earlier western interference).

There's tourism (how many countries have signs in english now or accept american money? Lots because there's a demand for it.)

There's immigration (USA and the indian territorites for one but also Spain has english towns where there is no spanish spoken and everyone eats fish and chiops from an englsih owned pub.)

There's prostitution.

Need I go on?
 

I saw a bird remove one once, she had been to prayers and after staring before she did it(with fantastic eyes) she lifted it off, and she was gorgeous, twas here, Gili Air..
Gili%20Air.jpg
 
Okay, I could start with the empires, that would be the obvious place to start. You said the last two hundred years so that covers the peak of the british Raj, of the interference in the far east and of Imperial africa.

Then there would be christian missionaries, they still exist and again the last two hundred years covers arguably their peak. Charity workers could be construed in the same manner, in particular the ones educating about condoms and the like in aids ridden countries or giving advie on irrigation.

Then you've got to talk about the industries, the mcdonalds in istanbul, the workers in bangladesh being taught english so they can do call centres, the africans being given free nestle milk so they don't breat feeed and then can be charged more for mik later (despite their culturally being a strogn taboo against not breast feeding), the way Japan's isolationist government was toppled by the american navy tso secure trade. The market forces are doing a lot to westernise the world because the industry leaders are often western. Sweatshop kids being given free nike tops and such like.

Then there's crime and the drug trade and the way western drugs and alcohol are exported to non western societes (american indians and aborginies for instance).

Then there's military force, and governments like Allende's or Hussien's overthrown by western governments because they were leading those countries in a path we didn't approve of. That's the defeniton of interfering with their laws.

There's enviromentalism and the numerous times it has tried to stop other cultures from hunting animals when it's built into their values. The trade for stuuf like viory and chinese medicals is a long standing part of their cultures as is whale hunting.

There's the campagin against slavery (part of the culture of a lot of societies, though it sometimes can be only traced back to other western interference).

There's tourism (how many countries have signs in english now or accept american money? Lots because there's a demand for it.)

There's immigration (USA and the indian territorites for one but also Spain has english towns where there is no spanish spoken and everyone eats fish and chiops from an englsih owned pub.)

There's prostitution.

Need I go on?

Soooooo... a strong western economy that trades with other countries is an imperialist attempt at replicating the Crusades now?

Riiight.

Anyway, to address your semi-serious points.

A) Christianity is a separate entity to the western way of life, which is by and large secular. Apart from how Christian values shaped the original common law, it has nothing to do with politics anymore.

B) Countries trade. That's a fact. As such, successful industry that is in demand is in demand in other countries outside their own. Lots of French, German, Chinese, American etc. companies operate here - that doesn't mean an infiltration into Britain. It's called a global economy and is generally recognised as a good thing. Countries choose to trade.

C) Drugs etc. are once again, sadly, supply and demand. Not only that, all cultures at any point in human history have taken mind altering substances. The fact several have become popular and can be traced to industrialised countries does not mean direct imposition on different cultures. They choose to do it.

D) Hussein I've explained above. Allende was during the Nixon era. No more needs to be said on that. "McCarthyism" would be another term to say, but that was an era of foreign policy madness. But you're right. For a period of 10 years, America escaped their traditional isolationism and interfered in matters they could have left well alone. But apart from that there's nothing in the modern era of the same substance.

E) Environmentalism is global. You make it sound like it's a big clan of westerners going over to subjugate ivory hunters. The truth is native people take the active role in stopping this happening. We also do it to ourselves by trying to prevent things like rainforest destruction. Furthermore, activism is often personal and hardly every government led. See Japanese whaling for example. As part of a global world, people take note of global issues.

F) Hehe... Wow... That's right, being against slavery is bad, m'kay?

G) Also, wow...

H) The fact English communities exist abroad tells you two things. One, that Spain encourages the input into the economy migrants and tourism brings. And two, that Spanish law is adhered to, and our culture congregates to incorporate our own culture amongst ourselves rather than enforce it on Spain as a whole.

I) Eh? Prostitution is as old as the hills. The west didn't export that at all! You might want to go back to Mary Magdalene and beyond and do some research!
 
This is what you said mate "No matter our faults, there's one thing westerners don't do - go into foreign lands and (try to) enforce our way of life onto their beliefs and rules.".

You later clarified that you only meant in the last 200 years.

Now that's bollocks.

One westerner, with no government support and the rest of the west hating him, going into sudan 199 years ago and saying they should stop slavery and eating puppies would prove you wrong.

If you actually meant something a lot more specific than that then you should have worded it better.
 

I don't understand your point.

You complained that some Muslims people wanted to come to this country and have their women wear burkas which goes against our social rules.

Then say westerners don't do the same.

Well doing the same is 2 westerners kissing on a beach in Dubai which goes against their rules.

Instead of obeying the rules and laws of the land they done what they wanted to do, something which is accepted in their culture but not in the one they are in.

I'd be very surpried if every westerner who went to a middle eastern (or any foreign country) would follow their rules and laws if they were different to ours.

Bet there's plenty who would do what they do here thinking that they are in a backwards country with stupid laws.
 
Instead of obeying the rules and laws of the land they done what they wanted to do, something which is accepted in their culture but not in the one they are in.

I'd be very surpried if every westerner who went to a middle eastern (or any foreign country) would follow their rules and laws if they were different to ours.

Bet there's plenty who would do what they do here thinking that they are in a backwards country with stupid laws.

The prime example of that is Uganda actually. Uganda has banned homosexuallity in the same way France has banned the Burkha. And westerners have reacted in much the same way (that's outrageous, they need to change that law, lets riot) as the muslims have. No respect for other culture's values there.
 
I don't understand your point.

You complained that some Muslims people wanted to come to this country and have their women wear burkas which goes against our social rules.

Then say westerners don't do the same.

Well doing the same is 2 westerners kissing on a beach in Dubai which goes against their rules.

Instead of obeying the rules and laws of the land they done what they wanted to do, something which is accepted in their culture but not in the one they are in.

I'd be very surpried if every westerner who went to a middle eastern (or any foreign country) would follow their rules and laws if they were different to ours.

Bet there's plenty who would do what they do here thinking that they are in a backwards country with stupid laws.

Actually no, I'm talking about the new French law.

Difference is the couple in Dubai got arrested and rightly dealt with by the land they did it in. So in the instance a westerner goes against cultural laws in another country, they get dealt with.

Over here, we don't have a law that states the burka is illegal, like Dubai do in terms of public lewdness, so the comparison is invalid -whilst there is no law against it, then the burka is legal.

My point is that we don't cause an uproar that the law in Dubai exists, whilst there's a massive deal being made out of the burka being banned in France.

The difference is respect, in my eyes. I respect the law that exists in Dubai, even though I feel public kissing is no big deal at all. I don't understand why Muslims can't respect the law that now exists in France.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top