You have commented 338 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Europe
Dutch seek ban on burkas in public
2006-11-17
The Dutch government, facing re-election next week, said Friday it plans to draw up legislation "as soon as possible" banning the head-to-toe garment known as burkas and other clothing that covers the entire face in public places. The announcement puts the Netherlands, once considered one of Europe's most welcoming nations for immigrants and asylum seekers, at the forefront of a general European hardening of attitudes toward Muslim minorities.

"The Cabinet finds it undesirable that face-covering clothing -- including the burka -- is worn in public places for reasons of public order, security and protection of citizens," Immigration Minister Rita Verdonk said in a statement.

"From a security standpoint, people should always be recognizable and from the standpoint of integration, we think people should be able to communicate with one another," Verdonk told national broadcaster NOS.
Posted by:Pholing Glineque9578

#7  The Burka has less to do with video cameras than it has to do with western ideals. If you want to wear a burka great, go to Yemen and swelter in peace. We don't cover our women here like chattel. We don't gang rape women and challenge them to come up with four witnessnes. If you want to live like a 9th century barbarian good on ya, but not in the western hemisphere. Go to north africa or some shithole, but don't come here.
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2006-11-17 18:48  

#6  Ninja style....
Posted by: Ulaiting Angolulet3961   2006-11-17 16:12  

#5  Zenster is exactly right. Watch The Battle of Algiers, the tactical use of the burka/niqab has been around for a long time.
Posted by: Excalibur   2006-11-17 16:06  

#4  Besides which, many states here in the US already have anti-mask laws in place : they were put in place to protect against that American domestic terrorist group, the KKK. Anonymity using their hoods to cover their faces made the Klan an effective terrorist group, since you could not visually identify their members, outside of their garb. Unfortunately, here in Oregon, the Mayors of Portland have consistent chosen NOT to enforce said laws against the anarchists, Muslims, eco-terrorists, etc.
Posted by: Shieldwolf   2006-11-17 16:03  

#3  You cannot identify people who appear on security cameras wearing a burqa. Nor is any presented personal identification verifiable. The burqa also presents a perfect opportunity for male terrorist operatives to both disguise themselves with less chance of interception and enhance their ability to transport explosives or weapons.

Male terrorists have already been apprehended several times using a burqa as a disguise. What's the big mystery here?

Finally, burqas are worn by those who belong to the most extremist sects of Islam. By outlawing this apparel, members of these violence prone groups will be less likely to immigrate here. This is a major win-win situation for national security.
Posted by: Zenster   2006-11-17 15:36  

#2  Zenster, what does the Burka have anything to do with national security?
Posted by: Pholing Glineque9578   2006-11-17 15:26  

#1  Basing the order on security concerns apparently was intended to respond to warnings that outlawing clothing like the burka, worn by some Muslim women, could violate the constitutional guarantee against religious discrimination.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't national security tend to supercede the relatively limited possibility of religious discrimination?

America must waste no time before imposing this same ban.
Posted by: Zenster   2006-11-17 15:14  

00:00