Category Archives: Burka debate

France stands by its law banning burqa-like Muslim veils despite a threatening new message from al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, President Nicolas Sarkozy said Friday.

Posted on by

NEWSER

In a recently released audio tape, bin Laden threatens to kill French citizens in revenge for France’s law to ban Muslim veils that cover the face, and because France has troops in Afghanistan.

Sarkozy confirmed that France believes the tape is authentic and said the country would not back down from the new rule.

“Obviously, France doesn’t let anyone dictate its policies, and certainly not terrorists,” Sarkozy said at a European Union summit in Brussels.

Sarkozy said his country has made its choice and that it doesn’t want women in France “trapped behind pieces of fabric.”

France says that ensuring gender equality and women’s dignity _ and upholding a tradition of secularism _ are among the reasons France is outlawing fully covering Islamic veils, like niqabs, which hide all but the eyes. The measure has already become law but does not take effect until April. Many Muslims have expressed fears it will stigmatize them.

Asked by a reporter about French hostages being held by suspected Islamic militants, Sarkozy said France was working to secure their release.

“I didn’t need a message from Mr. bin Laden to know to be worried about them,” Sarkozy said.

Five French citizens and two Africans were kidnapped in Niger on Sept. 16, and an offshoot of bin Laden’s terror group called al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb has claimed responsibility. In another abduction, two French reporters and their Afghan guides were taken hostage in Afghanistan on Dec. 29.

Australia: male journalists ordered out of courtroom while Muslim woman testifies without niqab.

Posted on by

I predicted this. I knew it would only be a matter of time before sharia standards would be granted formal legitimacy and folded into western court proceedings. This woman refused to remove her niqab at a previous hearing, so to satisfy her irrational sensibilities, the judge decided that sacrificing Australia’s own laws of gender equality to suit Islamic gender apartheid practices would be a fair cultural exchange.

From The Australian

Muslim woman removes niqab to give evidence, as male journalists are barred from court

  • From: AAP
  • October 18, 2010 5:28PM

A MUSLIM woman who sparked a national debate when she asked to give evidence in court wearing a niqab has uncovered her face to testify in a fraud trial.

Tasneem, whose last name has been suppressed by the Perth District Court, gave evidence for just 15 minutes today in the trial of Anwar Sayed.

Mr Sayed, 50, is accused of falsifying student numbers at the Muslim Ladies College of Australia in Kenwick, in Perth’s south, to fraudulently obtain part of $1.125 million the school received in state and federal government grants.

Tasneem, 36, has worn a niqab since the age of 17 and wanted to wear it while giving evidence in the trial.

But Judge Shauna Deane in August ruled she must remove the face-covering garment so that the jury could see her facial expressions.

Tasneem only removes the niqab when she visits the doctor and dentist, at customs in airports and when she has her driver’s licence photograph taken.

Judge Deane last week ruled that to make it easier for Tasneem to give evidence comfortably, men would be removed from the court.

The only men allowed in the courtroom while she gave her evidence today were male jurors, the judge’s usher, Mr Sayed and the lawyers.

While female journalists were allowed to stay in the court to report on Tasneem’s evidence, male journalists were ejected.

A lawyer representing Network Ten and the Seven and Nine networks made an application on Friday to alter the order so that male journalists could remain in court, but the application was rejected.

Giving evidence via video link today, Tasneem appeared comfortable, flanked by a security person and a support person, both of whom were female.

During her brief evidence she explained that she worked at the school as an Islamic studies teacher for two hours a day, five days a week.

Tasneem said that “from time to time” some students would go overseas on holiday or to visit family, mostly in Afghanistan, so it was possible they were enrolled at the school, but did not attend for long periods of time.

Mr Sayed is the director of Muslim Link Australia, which runs the Muslim Ladies College.

He allegedly knowingly signed a declaration that in the 2006/07 census year, more than 180 students were enrolled in the school when there were 80 to 100 fewer than that.

The school received about $164,000 from the state government and about $961,000 from the federal government.

The trial continues.

AAP

Shariah law has come to Canada.

Posted on by

From The Ottawa Sun

Court decision puts veil over women’s rights

By EZRA LEVANT, QMI Agency

Last Updated: October 17, 2010 2:00am

It is illegal for a woman wearing a face-obscuring veil to board a plane in Canada. But a unanimous ruling last week by the Ontario Court of Appeal says it’s just fine for that same woman to give testimony in court with her face covered.

There’s more. Ontario’s highest court says veiled women can ask for an order to clear men out of the courtroom — any men in the public gallery, any male court staff, even her opponent’s lawyer, even the judge himself — in return for taking off her veil. It’s paragraph 85 of the ruling.

Shariah law has come to Canada.

Face-obliterating veils called niqabs are a medieval tool for gender apartheid. They destroy a woman’s identity. They turn her into an object, a chattel owned by her master — which is why they’re the norm in Saudi Arabia, where women have fewer rights than men and only slightly more than animals.

Burkas — an even more prison-like shroud, with just a tiny beekeeper’s screen to peek through — are the Taliban variety. Those are now allowed on the witness stand in Canada, too.

Rip the Ten Commandments off the wall, because we must have separation of church and state. But when the most un-Canadian expression of radical Islam walks in the court, our judges follow the Qur’an.

But that’s not fair to the Qur’an. No verse in that book requires face-covering. But our judges now say it’s a Charter right.

To their shame, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association intervened to support this. They have demanded Bibles be removed from schools and the Lord’s Prayer be banned from legislatures. But Muslim veils — a chastity belt for the face — have their support in a secular court.

The CCLA has found religion. And LEAF, the feminist law organization built with Canadian tax dollars, has a new view on a woman’s proper place. They argued for the niqab, too.

As National Post columnist Barbara Kay points out, a survey of Muslim women in France found 77% wear the veil out of fear of men.

Australian Imam Taj Din al-Hilali put it another way, in a sermon about rape: “If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street … and the cats come and eat it … whose fault is it, the cats’ or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem.”

LEAF supports covering up “the meat.” Now our courts do too.

The Ontario ruling came about because a Muslim woman alleged she was molested as a child by her uncle and her cousin in the 1980s. It’s a horrendous accusation and, if true, the woman deserves our sympathy and the accused deserve our most punitive punishment. But before we get there, there’s the matter of a trial.

In Canada, even accused rapists have the right to question their accuser and the court has the right to observe her demeanour. It’s why we don’t allow testimony from someone wearing a mask.

But this accuser didn’t want to take off her mask.

“It’s a respect issue, one of modesty and one of — in Islam, we call honour,” she told the judge at the preliminary inquiry “It’s to conceal the beauty of a woman.”

She had only been wearing a veil for about five years and the judge found her religious belief was “not that strong.” But “I would feel a lot more comfortable if I didn’t have to, you know, reveal my face.”

Sure, she took the veil off to get her driver’s licence. But that was important, you see. Not like accusing a man of a horrendous crime.

The judge told her to take off her veil. That’s what was over-ruled last week.

This could be great, says the Court of Appeal. The reliability of her veiled testimony could actually be better.

“Without the niqab … one could not expect her to be herself on the witness stand … her embarrassment and discomfort could be misinterpreted as uncertainty and unreliability.”

But it’s more than law. It’s politics, they say. Allowing the niqab “could be seen as a recognition and acceptance of those minority beliefs and practices.”

That’s exactly the problem.

In heaven, Aqsa Parvez is screaming again.

— Read Levant’s blog at ezralevant.com

Niqab is the “British way”

Posted on by

From The Telegraph U.K.

Islamic face-veil part of ‘British way of life’

The full Islamic face-veil is a part of the “British way of life” and should be celebrated along with religious symbols such as the crucifix, according to a report published today.

By Tim Ross, Religious Affairs Editor
Published: 8:30AM BST 16 Oct 2010
Islamic face-veil part of 'British way of life'

Politicians in France and Belgium have voted in favour of banning the full veil Photo: GETTY IMAGES

Opponents of the veil claim it oppresses women and presents a barrier between those who wear traditional dress and the rest of society.

But in a new report from think-tank Civitas, Alveena Malik, a former faith adviser to the last Labour government, said the test of whether religious symbols are appropriate should be based on whether they are practical.

Politicians in France and Belgium have voted in favour of banning the full veil, or “niqab”, and other European countries are thought to be considering similar action.

In a new report, Women, Islam and Western Liberalism, Mrs Malik said: “We in Britain need to take a different direction from others in Europe and to accept the veil as part of a modern British way of life.”

She continued: “The wearing of religious symbols, including the full veil, should be a fundamental human right of an individual in both the public and private sphere.

“The real test for religious symbols in the public sphere should always be: ‘Does the wearing of a symbol (such as the kirpan, turban, yarmulke, crucifix and the veil) hinder a citizen’s ability to perform their public civic duties?’”

Britain is in a “unique” position to embrace such a public display of faith because of the role the church plays in the affairs of the state and its “multicultural diversity”.

Mrs Malik was appointed by last government to a panel of faith advisers for the Department for Communities. She has overseen British Council guidance on “intercultural dialogue”.

Britain is losing its battle against Islamic extremists… says French MP who banned the burqa

Posted on by

From The Daily Mail:

By Peter Allen
Last updated at 10:41 AM on 15th October 2010

Britain is ‘losing the battle against Islamic extremism’ by failing to outlaw burqas, the architect of the French ban said today.

Jacques Myard, a senior member of President Nicolas Sarkozy’s ruling UMP party, said relaxed UK policies had ‘opened the door to terrorism’.

He added: ‘Allowing women to exclude themselves from society by wearing the full Islamic veil makes radicals extremely comfortable, and Britain should realise this.’

Jacques MyardMan behind the burqa ban: Jacques Myard, a member of Nicolas Sarkozy’s ruling UMP party, said relaxed UK policies have ‘opened the door to terrorism’

Mr Myard made his outspoken comments to British journalists in Qatar, where he was defending his country’s recent banning of the veil at the prestigious Qatar Foundation Doha Debates, which will be broadcast by the BBC this weekend.

His comments will inflame tensions between London and Paris five years after the 7/7 London bombings, which the French have regularly blamed on lax policing.

Referring to the 2005 atrocity, which left 52 dead and hundreds injured, Mr Myard added: ‘Britain has suffered a number of high-profile failures in its fight against extremism in recent years.

‘These could have been prevented if all signs of extremism were curbed, as they are in France.’ Continue Reading →

Canadian Court of Appeal ‘decides’ on niqabs in courtrooms

Posted on by

From The Ottawa Sun

Putting face on religion

By MICHELE MANDEL, QMI Agency

Last Updated: October 13, 2010 10:08pm

TORONTO – It is a typically Canadian solution.

The Ontario Court of Appeal won’t ban Muslim witnesses from wearing a face veil. Nor will the highest court in the province grant them an automatic right to do so.

Instead, in its highly anticipated decision, the appeal court has ruled right down the middle, saying “each case must turn on its own facts.”

As long as it doesn’t prejudice a fair trial, the court ruled, Muslim women should have the religious right to wear their niqab when testifying.

But if a judge is convinced by the accused that he can’t properly defend himself if she’s testifying against him behind a veil, the witness must remove her niqab and allow the face-to-face confrontation that is the norm in Canadian courts.

Justice system

“The criminal justice system as it presently operates, and as it has operated for centuries, places considerable value on the ability of lawyers and the trier of fact to see the full face of the witness as the witness testifies,” wrote Justice David Doherty in the ruling released Wednesday morning on behalf of the three-judge panel.

“There is no getting around the reality that in some cases, particularly those involving trial by jury where a witness’s credibility is central to the outcome, a judge will have a difficult decision to make.”

It was not a clear-cut victory for any side, but one cautiously applauded by all.

“It’s a real step forward,” said David Butt, lawyer for N.S., the Toronto woman who was ordered to remove her niqab at a preliminary hearing. “This walks a middle ground that balances two very important, competing rights.”

N.S. came forward in 2007 and accused her uncle and cousin of sexually abusing her as a child. When the case went to a preliminary hearing in 2008, she said she wanted to testify while wearing her niqab. When the judge ruled against her, she took her case to the Ontario Court of Appeal in June.

In its 54-page decision, the three-judge appeal panel ruled that there needs to be a “case by case assessment” and for the first time set out guidelines for judges in these previously “uncharted waters”.

For N.S., the appeal court overturned her niqab ban and said she must be given a proper hearing to show why her religion requires her to cover all but her eyes.

The defence must also be allowed to call evidence on the issue before the judge decides if she can testify wearing her veil or whether accommodations can be made for her testimony — such as an all-female court.

“The court did not decide the crux issue of whether the niqab comes off or stays on,” said N.S.’ lawyer.

“On the other hand, the court has given us a very firm set of factors to guide us.”

The Criminal Lawyers’ Association had argued that a witness can’t be properly cross-examined if their face is concealed but was satisfied with the ruling.

“It is a paradigmatic, Canadian decision insofar as it strikes a very workable compromise rather than making a choice between two important competing values,” noted association president Paul Burstein. “Time will tell.”

Tarek Fatah, founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress, was relieved the court of appeal did not grant an automatic right to give testimony behind the veil, which he insists is a political, not a religious, symbol. But he was troubled the appeal court seemed to bend over backwards to accommodate women wearing a face covering many in the west see as backward and misogynistic.

“They do not think that Muslim women are women per se, but some kind of exotic species that they have to nurture in the laboratory that’s called Canada,” Fatah complained.

For its part, the appeal court wisely shied away from making a definitive ruling on a piece of cloth that continues to divide.

“The wearing of a niqab in public places is controversial in many countries including Canada,” Doherty wrote.

“The controversy raises important public policy concerns that have generated heated debate. Those difficult and important questions are not the focus of this proceeding and cannot and should not be resolved in this forum.”

mi************@******ia.ca

Niqabs in Canadian courts???

Posted on by

From The National Post

Ontario court to rule if woman can wear niqab while testifying

The Ontario Court of Appeal is expected to rule if women can testify in court while wearing a niqab.

For the first time in Canada, an appellate level court is going to rule on whether a woman can testify in court while wearing a niqab.

The Ontario Court of Appeal is scheduled to release its ruling Wednesday in the case of a 32-year-old Muslim woman who says she was sexually abused as a child by two male relatives.

The decision will be issued just days after the constitutional council in France approved legislation that will ban the wearing of a burqa or a niqab in public places. Women who wear the face-covering clothing could face fines of nearly $200. Anyone in France who forces a woman to wear a burqa or niqab could be sentenced to a year in jail.

In the case before the Ontario Court of Appeal, the woman was originally ordered by a provincial court judge in October 2008 to remove the Muslim veil, which covers most of her face except for her eyes, while testifying at the preliminary hearing of the defendants.

The alleged sexual assault victim refused and the Ontario Court of Appeal heard arguments from the Crown and defence, as well as several other groups, during a two-day hearing in June.

The Ontario government urged the court not to issue a “blanket statement” and instead set out a legal framework for courts to decide the issue on a case-by-case basis. The appeal court could for example, allow limited questioning of a female Muslim witness, to ensure that her religious reasons for wearing the niqab are legitimate.

A lawyer for one of the two defendants argued that there is a long-standing right to assess the demeanor of witnesses when they testify and the woman should have to remove the niqab. The Muslim Canadian Congress sided with the defendants and its lawyer told the court that wearing the niqab is a political statement and the issue is not about religious freedoms.

The Ontario Human Rights Commission and the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF) argued in favour of the woman’s right to testify while wearing the niqab. The lawyer representing LEAF suggested the woman should not have to “relive being forcibly uncovered,” if ordered to remove the niqab in court.

sk***@**********st.com

Italy to become next European country to ban burka after government report recommends forbidding it in public

Posted on by

From The Daily Mail:

By Nick Pisa
Last updated at 1:41 PM on 7th October 2010
Ban: Italy could become the next European country to ban the burka after a government report ruled in favour of legislation to prohibit wearing it in publicBan: Italy could become the next European country to ban the burka after a government report ruled in favour of legislation to prohibit wearing it in public

Italy is set to become the next European country to ban the burka after a government report ruled in favour of the proposed legislation.

MPs from the anti-immigration Northern League party, a member of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi’s ruling right wing coalition, have presented the proposal in a bill.

It comes just weeks after France banned the wearing of burkas and other forms of face veils – a decision which prompted al Qaeda terrorists to vow revenge.

An Interior Ministry report now being considered by the Constitutional Affairs Commission says that if introduced the law should make clear burkas and other face coverings were being banned not for ‘religious reasons but for security reasons.’ Continue Reading →

Niqabs banned at Burnley College, Lancashire

Posted on by

From The Daily Mail, U.K.

UK sixth form college bans the veil ‘for security reasons’

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 6:13 PM on 24th September 2010

A college has drawn criticism after it banned any Muslims on its premises from wearing veils for ‘security reasons’.

Burnley College, in Lancashire, placed a notice from principal Hugh Bramwell at  reception informing all students, staff and visitors they must remove items which cover their face on arrival.

But while bosses claim the move was necessary for security, the University of Central Lancashire, which runs courses from the same building, has not implemented the policy.

Burnley College, in Lancashire, has placed a notice at reception informing all students, staff and visitors they must remove items which cover their faceBurnley College, in Lancashire, has placed a notice at reception informing all students, staff and visitors they must remove items which cover their face.

Critics have now hit out at the ban – which includes helmets – insisting it denies people the ‘freedom to wear what they want.’ Continue Reading →

Woman threatens France with suicide bomb attack after burka ban

Posted on by

Found through The Religion of Peace.com

From Metro.co.uk

A woman who has threatened to blow herself up on the Paris transport system is being hunted by police.

Brice Hortefeux Fear: France’s Interior Minister Brice Hortefeux

The bomb threat, which followed France’s ban last week on the Muslim burka headdress, was being taken ‘extremely seriously’, said an interior ministry source.

Stop-and-search tactics were being used at all major transport hubs, including the Eurostar terminal, and British tourists and other visitors were warned to be on their guards.

‘Women have successfully carried out kamikaze attacks in other parts of the world, including the Middle East, and there is a great fear that one is planning such an atrocity in France,’ said the source.

‘Middle Eastern desert dress is often used to hide explosives in cases like this.

‘Everything possible is being done to find this woman before it’s too late.’

The ban on the Muslim face veil has prompted threats from radical Islamist groups including al-Qaeda.

There was a bomb warning at the Eiffel Tower last Thursday, while senior politicians and the moderate rector of Paris’s Grande Mosquée, Dalil Boubakeur, have been given armed guards after death threats.

Interior minister Brice Hortefeux said: ‘The terrorist threat is real and today our vigilance is reinforced. There are an array of clues… which show the terrorist threat is extremely high.’

Iranian woman facing death by stoning is ‘lashed 99 MORE times’ after newspaper prints picture of her without headscarf

Posted on by

Daily Mail: UK

By Mail Foreign Service
Last updated at 8:13 PM on 5th September 2010

Lashings: Sakineh Mohammad Ashtiani was allegedly whipped 99 times after an incorrect picture of her appeared in a newspaper

Lashings: Sakineh Mohammad Ashtiani was allegedly whipped 99 times after an incorrect picture of her appeared in a newspaper

An Iranian widow sentenced to death by stoning for adultery has been lashed 99 times for ”spreading corruption and indecency” after a newspaper published an alleged picture of her without a headscarf, her son said last night.

Sakineh Mohammad Ashtiani, 43, was convicted of “adultery while being married” and given the death penalty after a trial over her husband’s murder in 2006.

The widow’s son Sajad, 22, has campaigned for her to be released and after the plight caused international uproar her execution was halted in July.

But supporters’ hopes have been dashed after Sajad said that his mother has been whipped 99 times after an apparent picture of her without traditional head-dress appeared in The Times last week.

The newspaper quickly withdrew the picture claiming it was of a different Iranian woman living in Sweeden but Sajad now fears that his mother could be hanged.

He said the photograph was an excuse to punish his mother and that the hardline Iranian government’s real purpose was to silence the international campaign to save her.

‘If it wasn’t the picture they would have found another excuse to try and silence her supporters outside Iran’, he said.

The Times said that it had been sent the photo “in good faith” by Mohammad Mostafaei, who was Sakineh’s lawyer in Tehran until he was forced to flee Iran at the end of July for publicising her plight.

Outrage: Sakineh's plight has caused international uproar and her supporters hope that her death sentence will be quashedOutrage: Sakineh’s plight has caused international uproar and her supporters hope that her death sentence will be quashed Continue Reading →

Australian judge orders Muslim woman to remove niqab in court

Posted on by

From The Daily Mail U.K.

Muslim woman who hasn’t shown her face in public for 18 years ordered to remove veil to give evidence in Australian court

By Richard Shears
Last updated at 1:11 PM on 19th August 2010

The eyes have it: An Australian judge has ordered the witness to remove her niqab, a veil which leaves only the eyes visible (file photo)An Australian judge has ordered a witness to remove her niqab, a veil which leaves only the eyes visible. (File photo)

A strict Muslim woman who says she has never shown her face in public, has been ordered by a female judge to remove her veil when she gives evidence in an Australian court.

District Court judge Shauna Deane said in the Western Australian Supreme Court today that in the interest of a fair trial against a man accused of fraud, she should not be allowed to wear a niqab, which allows only the eyes to be seen.

The 36-year-old woman, known only as Tasneem, said she was a strict Muslim and it was against her religion to show her face anywhere except in the confines of her home. Continue Reading →

Murdering Muslim Male hides under burka

Posted on by

CTV News:

Toronto Police help in search for murder suspect

View larger image View larger image

Windsor Police have released these undated photos of Mohamud Abukar Haji, 27.Windsor Police have released these undated photos of Mohamud Abukar Haji, 27.

Updated: Wed Aug. 11 2010 3:22:07 PM

ctvtoronto.ca

Toronto Police are helping their Windsor colleagues search for a murder suspect by plastering a reward poster in the Eglinton Avenue West and Weston Road area.

Windsor Police have issued a Canada-wide arrest warrant for  Hagi on a charge of first-degree murder.

The 27-year-old is being sought in connection with the Dec. 22, 2007 death of Luis Acosta-Escobar, who was found dead of gunshot wounds near a Windsor nightclub.

Det. Wayne Parsons of the Windsor Police’s major crimes branch told CTV News on Wednesday that they know Hagi took a cab to Toronto in the hours after Escobar’s death.

“He was anxious to get out of town,” Parsons said.

They know Hagi had approached people on the street, including an off-duty firefighter, and offered them a large amount of cash to be driven to Toronto, he said. Continue Reading →

Liberal party shuts down investigation into security at airports

Posted on by

BREAKING NEWS:  Ignatieff Liberals shut down Conservative government’s bid to study airport security screening

Today, at the request of Conservative MPs, the House of Commons Committee on Public Safety reconvened to discuss recent media reports that suggested some individuals routinely board aircraft without being visually identified.

In an astonishing act, the Ignatieff Liberals, led by Mark Holland took over the Chair position of the Committee and proceeded to unilaterally shut the meeting down.

The safety and security of Canadians remains a top priority for Our Government.  Shockingly, it is such a low priority for the Ignatieff Liberals they refuse to even discuss it.

Instead, Liberal Committee members chose to play partisan games, use delay tactics and cancel the meeting altogether.

By failing to take this security and public safety issue seriously, the Ignatieff Liberals show yet again they’re not in it for Canadians, they are only in it for themselves.
Click more for French: Continue Reading →

Solution to the world wide burka debate

Posted on by

Well, its debated at least in the parts of the world where debate is allowed. Of course, in much of the Islamic world, there is no debate on it. Women must wear it and the degree of severity is increasing, not decreasing.

I have taken the position that making some kind of garment illegal is a bad idea, contrary to purpose, and sets a dangerous precedent. Instead, governments should do, what they should do in general far more often, which is let the private sector determine what is in it’s own interest.

If the government simply does not interfere in our rights to not let burka clad or face covered women into our own homes, stores, businesses, taxis or mass transit etc. then these coverings become so inconvenient that they will not be worn. We need the same rights we have always had to determine our own interests. Precedents like the smoking bans in private bars have set the stage for governments to determine all that goes on inside. As a consequence, Muslims demand the right not only to do what they want in private space, but are beginning to demand we do not do what we want in private space. In this issue, as in so many, less government and regulation means less problems.

Thank you very much Tundra Tabloids for mocking up this sign for me so quickly.

Eeyore for Vlad