Franska bloggen Gallia-Watch tar en artikel av Yves Daoudal till hjälp för att resonera runt utredningen av burkor i Franrike. Oavsett om muslimska kvinnor får eller inte får bära burka så är de islamister, och kanske blir ännu mer fanatiska om man förbjuder dem att bära sin religiösa klädsel.
Tanken är intressant, men jag kan inte förstå att man inte förbjuder människor att isolera sig och maskera sig i ett demokratiskt samhälle, att man låter dem försvåra på arbetsplatser genom att de bär en ohygienisk och mycket smittbärande klädsel.
Samt att de religiösa sederna tvingar dem till plikter som hindrar dem att utföra sina arbeten säkert och tryggt och att finnas på plats under dagens arbetstimmar.
Religionen islam är numera ett skäl till förtidspension i Norden, och det är obegripligt att en religion numera ska räknas som en sjukdom och tas som intäkt för en rätt att slippa arbeta i sekulära länder.
”My previous post mentioned the position taken by Nicolas Sarkozy on the burqa – the full-length covering worn by some Muslim women. His position was a critical moment in his June 22 address to Congress:
”The burqa will not be welcome on the territory of the Republic…”
In its forcefulness and its pro-Western outlook his latest remark, stating clearly that such a garment has no place on French territory because it symbolizes the degraded status of women, runs counter to his previous remark on a similar subject. The French press has had numerous articles on this recent toughening of his earlier, more liberal attitude. Many applaud his courage. But, the burqa is much more than a question of a woman’s place in society, be it Muslim or French. It is, rather, the visible evidence of an unpleasant truth.
It is interesting to note that the original initiative for a law banning the burqa came from the Communists.
Once again, I turn to Yves Daoudal’s weekly journal Nº 41, for a general summary of the situation:
The Communist mayor of Vénissieux, André Gérin, requested the formation of a parliamentary committee to study the wearing of the burqa and the niqab in the street, making no attempt to disguise his intention of passing legislation that bans such garments in public places. Two other Communist deputies, 7 Socialists, 43 UMP party members, 3 members of the Nouveau Centre, and 3 independents followed suit. Then, other UMP deputies joined in.
The article speaks of the stormy debate triggered by the actions of the deputies, and of Sarkozy’s volte-face:
This is the same Sarkozy who, on June 6, had declared himself to be in ”complete agreement” with Barack Obama, who had said in Cairo:
”Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid preventing Muslims from practicing their religion as they so choose, for example, by dictating what Muslim women can wear.”
(…) The first thing one observes is that these deputies, who represent the entire political spectrum, having hooked up with a committed Stalinist, are all worried about a phenomenon that their own parties have engendered. For when they were in power, it was these parties that opened wide the flood gates to immigration, that pushed and continue to push immigration, that sang in every key about how immigration was France’s good fortune, and that demonized the patriots who warned about the dangers France would face, and that justified laws that dragged anyone who criticized Islam before the courts, and that never cease to clamor for non-discrimination…
But wait a minute. Of course it is discriminatory to forbid women from dressing according to their belief… And to those who say that these women are forced to dress this way and need to be liberated, it is easy to respond that many of these women do it voluntarily, the best proof of this being that many of them are ethnic Frenchwomen who ”converted”. And those women all tell the same story of how they met a Muslim man, and began by wearing a scarf, then the hijab, then the niqab, as they gradually progressed into Islamic law…
The fact of the matter is that we are seeing more and more burqas and niqabs in our streets, as in the Maghreb or in Egypt, where, only a few years ago, we hardly saw more of them than in France.
Note: He is saying that there are more burqas and niqabs in North Africa and Egypt than there were a few years ago, something I was not aware of.
The debate is ridiculous. As ridiculous as the ban on hoods in street demonstrations. The decree banning hoods was passed last Saturday, in the middle of the debate on the burqa. More and more laws that serve no purpose are piling up. Because French law has always explicitly banned the wearing of anything that masks the face, except during a carnival. Therefore the law has always banned the wearing of niqabs and burqas. If you don’t want to see hoods or burqas, you have only to enforce the law…
Note: The hoods he refers to are those frightening face coverings worn by rioters.
He goes on to explain that Jean-Marie Le Pen is the only one he knows of to have pointed this out.
We all know Jean-Marie Le Pen’s opinion on this subject, because he has expressed it many times: the increase in the number of veiled women indicates to everyone the progression of immigration on our territory.
This opinion takes on special meaning today. Because these deputies who no longer want to see niqabs or burqas have no intention of defending French identity. They are immigrationists. Their goal, hidden under the cover of an all-purpose ”laïcité”, is just that – to hide the progression of the most Islamist immigration and the most radical form of Islam.
And they don’t run out of steam when it comes to calling for respect for ”laïcité”, when they are the very ones who finance the mosques (…)
If we forbid women to wear the niqab, they will stop, but they will still be on our soil. It is better to know whom you are dealing with, both in this case, and in general.
The habit does not make the monk, but the proverb can be reversed: one can be a monk without the habit. Women without their niqab will still be Islamists, and even more so since they will feel persecuted.
This is typical of a false problem to which are brought false solutions, based on false principles.
The real problem is one of Islamic immigration. As my good friend Marshall de la Palice says: as long as there is Islamic immigration, there will be a progression of Islamism. Closing your eyes to the truth by banning the niqab changes nothing.
Therefore, it is urgent that immigration be stopped. And it is urgent to stop the false dogma repeated everywhere that Islam is ”a religion like the others” and that we must respect it ”like the others”. The political leaders ought to have at least enough curiosity to ponder what Islam really is. The bishops and the priests too, who participate fully in this illusion of a ”religion like the others”, and who deceive the Catholic faithful. The bishops’ job is not to participate in the inauguration of mosques, but to convert the Muslims.
French readers can consult Jean-Marie Le Pen’s video from his ”journal de bord”. The part about the burqa starts approximately 3 minutes 40 seconds into the discussion.
An English-language discussion on the story can be found at Lawrence Auster’s VFR.
Illustration from Le Point.”
The Burqa – False Problem, False Solutions, Gallia-Watch