Dubai Forums archive (old posts) - to navigate to the current version click Dubai Forums
Dubai Expat Help Dubai Chat Dubai Romance Dubai Auto Honda for sale in Dubai Dubai High Tech Dubai Guide Villas in Dubai Accommodation in Dubai Jobs in Dubai Available Professionals in Dubai Learn Arabic Philosophy Forum
Dubai Expat Forum - Dubai politics talk

Muslim mother excluded from school


chevaliers-de-sion The school operates a policy which requires anyone entering the building to remove specific headwear for identification purposes She claims the problem first surfaced at a parents' evening two years when she was told she was not allowed into the main hall while wearing her niqab. The full veil, which covers all the body except the eyes, is worn by a minority of Muslim women in the UK as part of their religious beliefs, to protect their modesty from men. The woman, who does not wish to be named, said: "I explained that I was willing to take off the veil in front of the female teachers, but not the male teachers. "A year later the same thing happened when I went to drop my son off at the school. Then this week at a parent's evening I signed myself in and saw two teachers in the library as I was not allowed in the main hall. the headteacher, said the school was rated as "outstanding" by Ofsted for community cohesion, care and guidance. She said whilst it was acceptable for women to wear veils on a one-to-one basis at meeting, difficulties could arise when people were wandering around corridors or rooms This is the same town that became the focus of national attention in 2006 when its MP Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, suggested the wearing of veils could damage community relations because they were a "visible statement of separation and of difference".
Speedhump Can you please quote URL's to the articles which you are quoting, thanks.
If wearing beachwear in the street offends the nationals of the UAE, then why can't the wearing of niqab in specific circumstances offend western secular socities? Where is the difference? Just because it's not the UK's 'religion' that is offended (or France's where this has happened also), how is that no other means of 'offence' is acknowledged? rudeboy
lol i guess muslim women will not be allowed to wear hijaabs in the streets of UK because of national security threat. LOL british facists. Speedhump
What you *guess* is a load of b*llocks. I sincerely believe you have no idea of what the word facist actually means either.
By the way, aren't you the Indian hater? You're a nice one to be talking about racist Brits and Aussies in that other thread. You disgust me. rudeboy
what i guess is not a load of bolocks because if they are already banned from schools. they will be banned from shops, cinemas, town centers and you get the pic :D. give england politicians another 2 to 3 years and see what laws they come up with.
why cant u brits stick to the topic for gods sake? so i say something bad about the IPL, or corrupt indians in dubai and all of a sudden I am a indian hater? lol lets stick to the topic and indians are certainly not the topic in this thread ;) smokedawg speedhump is right, you don't know what a facist is, otherwise you wouldn't be calling them that. I like yje poiny made about locals getting offended if we were to impose our Western ideals on them such as believing it's ok to wear short skirts, tight jeans or males jogging without a shirt. The point is we live here in their country and should respect their culture. The responsibility shifts in the West as we are obligated to respect and abide by other cultures' ideals in the name of tolerance. Also, except for indians themselves, we are all indian haters to some extent. chevaliers-de-sion She is obligated to respect and abide by British cultures and if they don`t like it there in Britian see should contact the BNP and see if they would like to help her repatriate Speedhump
and let's look at:

Quite the little liar aren't you.....
You hate the British and you hate Indians, and who knows who else you hate. You are the racist, little man. And that definitely IS relevant in this thread, you made it so.
You are also too scared to tell people which country you are from. So we have a cowardly liar.
;) Speedhump
You spoiled your post with the Indian comment.
But that aside, little rudeboy's problem is that he is sad because British tolerance is becoming a bit strained because 'Islamist' terrorist bombs are killing people in the UK, which is causing friction between people there, and he really cannot understand the simple reactions and reasoning of everyday, simple people, even though he is a pretty simple one himself.
He also wants to see Muslims being allowed to live by their own laws in the UK, and if that can't happen then the UK is 'facist'.
It's a little pathetic, but in keeping with his ridiculous attitudes on the forums in general. Red Chief
Unfortunately not only Rudeboy uses this word misplaced. It was a great Duce's idea about collaboration between Labour and Capital in national state.
Surprisingly Germans have been using this idea even after WWII upto now.

1 Dubai Jobs .com The First Place to Find a Job in Dubai
Red Chief
To put it blunty why do you, Speedy, accept all those Muslim who don't want to integrate in UK? If you need plumbers, bus drivers and dustmen why don't you take it in the poor members of EU? Their ancestry at least crusaded with your Lionheart almost 1000 years ago.
By the way I read a new article about granting citizenship in the UAE written by your lovely Qassimi. At his point of view the applicant should be not only Muslim, but also wear local dreass, eat by hands and use water instead of toilet paper. He name it as an integration to the local culture. kanelli The woman should send her husband to the school if she can't show her face to any possible men there. In many other world cultures it is not okay to cover your face, which masks your identity. Others cultures value seeing who is in their presence and using non-verbal queues from facial expressions as part of communication. Just as women who live in stricter Muslim countries cover themselves to respect the culture, so should Muslim women living in other cultures. She can cover her body an hair, but he face should be shown. Chocoholic This 'story' is over a year old! Speedhump
Can you supply the link to the article if it's online, or online reference to it, I haven't seen it.
You have held the coin in your hand and looked at both sides of it. Is one the right side and one the wrong? We can consider this.
On one side you have the 'open door' policy that the UK practised, allowing anyone to enter and apply for a passport. Not just for low paid workers, literally anyone who was not an undesirable, plus their wives, sisters, children, ancient uncles, non-working grandfathers, all of whom take advantage of free healthcare, government handouts for housing, education, everything.......
On the other side you have countries who won't let you become a citizen unless you gve up all your former country's beliefs and hold down a well paid job.
Soclaist goverment started the rot in the UK in the 1960's, and no later government has had the balls to stand against it to a great enough degree to make a difference. Now as I said in another thread it's too late.
Which of these sounds a more sensible long-term plan, Harold Wilson (UK), 1960-64, with a complete reversal of policy in 1965 after the damage was done, or Al Qassimi (UAE) 2009?
Nation states should be selfish and should look after the affairs of their citizens. But the UAE's position can well change with time, nothing moves quickly here. Just even publicly considering the idea of granting citizenship to 'some' other nationalities is a large step.

If you have (or anyone else has) any interest, there is a very factual book online on how the UK has become so widely populated with immigrants. I hesitate to use the term 'multicultural' as I don't believe that it is. A Jamaican Jerk Chicken shop on every highstreet and an Indian grocery shop on every corner does not mean that groups mingle and interact, but my son has quite a few friends who like to consider themselves Indian or West Indian (e.g. Jamaican), but who were born in the UK. I think the attitudes of the young may be making a difference, despite the horror stories that the newspapers love to get hold of and make sound as though they are the norm.
&dq=British+immigration+policy+since+1939&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=vMwkSqW2C5iQmAfzn9iGCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#PPA1,M1
I am in the process of reading it myself, but it's in a long queue of reading I am doing. Maybe I need to take a year off work to read all the damn books I buy..... Red Chief
archive(dot)gulfnews(dot)com/articles/09/05/31/10318395.html Speedhump
Yes that's all it means. The third way, middle path of strong government control between total laissez-faire economic theory and total state control of the means of production.
But isn't its closed one party system close to 'real life' communism in its belief in repression of protest and opposition? Red Chief Duce Mussolini had been a socialist/communist. Then he looked at how permanent strikes was destroing Italian weak economy after WWI and invented another way based on collaboration inside one nation. I think it was better than Communism. Speedy, you don't whant to understand that there is no single receipt for modernising economy. Pure capitalism of UK XiX century described by Marks doesn't exist. Socialism, Fasism, Japanese way were the ways of surviving different nations. Each big nation invented own way. On the other hand it's mostly a question of measure. IMHO 50% of income tax is very close to socialism. Speedhump
I have never said what I do or don't want. Now I will. I don't want to live under Communism, or at least any form currently existing in the world. Nor do I think that totally free markets work either (and you have to go back to the Brit, Adam Smith for the roots of that ideology, not Marx who came later).
I believe in a mixed economy, state control of some industries that are vital to the national economy, and free market for the rest to drive innovation and capitalisation. The UK did that well for a time, but generally as a democracy has always tilted too strongly to one side or other for a time, before being brought back the other way by the election of a different set of politicians. The problem is that some industries become 'political footballs' being kicked into nationalisation and then back out again several times by different governments, and suffer as a result. However the overall effect over a long period is a middle path and no strong final path to left or right.
Economic theory is only that; theory. In practise there is no 'correct' single solution to all problems in highly developed economies.
You may have a point about high tax but in the UK it's considered 'socialist', not 'communist', is that splitting hairs? Red Chief
After your rants I feel myself as an apologist of Communism for "our country and the rest of the World". I'm definitely not.
I don't force and don't encourage you to live in Communist State. I don't offer Anglsoc for UK, what Orwell was afraid of, either. I only try to indicate that both Communism and Fascism were rather efficient instruments on some stage of development of the appropriate nations. They were both more suitable in preparation of WWII at least. :) Nowadays China shows great economical results (much greater than Indian democracy) by mixing Communism with Japanese way. Anyway Fascism is not possible in Russia due to a lot of minorities although it would be suitable way I think.
IMHO Liberal deregulated economy is a way to bubbles and chaos what current depression shows.
Speedhump
Can I humbly suggest that China received an injection of adrenaline when they were given back Hong Kong, and the effects of naked capitalism immediately started to spread to the local mainland, and then even further.
I would be happy to hear more about the Japanese effect also. Red Chief
Speedy, don't start it again. The permanent economical growth of P.R. of China was started after reform of Den Xiao Ping and from the beginning of 1980s it has been up 10% yearly. The presence of Hong Kong was vital even before take over. Anyway it's not a theme for DF. If you want to continue we can do it outside, drinking a couple of beer. :) This bloody local internet makes me mad. Misery Called Life
:lol: :lol:
It's funny how large communist countries begin to think in terms of superiority and global domination. China certainly has similar thoughts right now.

What is the Japanese way, Red Chief?
And India and China have it easy. Billion plus people, the Keynesian Cross road map is already available for governments. Whats the real challenge? In present circumstances if these countries can't achieve a positive growth rate, it would be a failure. It's so much more challenging in Western nations.
But if Obama's bailout was anything to go by, it's Viva Keynes once again. Speedhump
No problem, and I agree that HK's 'regional' influence was always important to China.
But 'owning' HK has make it very much easier for Chinese mainland businesses to enter international markets. HK acts as a door (now that barriers are completely down), Chinese can easily attract big HK investors who are comfortable with them culturally and politically. American/European investors still are not so keen on China, protectionism being a main thought I guess.
Anyway, I agree we should stop as it's not relevant to the thread, and people may see we can discuss without arguing, occasionally ;) Red Chief
Whose disapproval are you afraid of? It looks like that Pandora's box has a rest and is going to stay closed for a while. :) Speedhump
I don't mind who approves or disapproves of me here, they can make their own minds up. It's only an Internet chat forum, it's not my mother :) rudeboy didnt the nazis label the jews and other nationalities in germany? how is that different from this? A muslim mother is being labelled as a security threat. women wearing hijab are banned from schools. isnt school a public area? i give england another 5 years before they come up with laws banning muslim women from all public areas for the clothes they wear. Speedhump Thank god that the West will not give in to the stupidity of the ME and allow criminals (men) to walk through security checks and escape dressed as Muslim women because no-one will touch them. I'd label you, as an idiot. They want to live in the UK, Germany, Netherlands, wherever THEY MUST CONFORM. Red Chief
Why do you make such a personal remark as soon as you are not a psychiatrist? Are you?
Anyway as near as I remember Jews and Christians were marked in the Mediaeval Arab Caliphate at first. It was yellow-diamond sign on their dress. :) Speedhump
We have been through this before.
The word idiot was used by me in a colloquial sense, not a clinical sense. It's very common usage. Now make a note in your Moleskine this time please :P
Wikipedia:
In modern English usage, the terms "idiot" and "idiocy" describe an extreme folly or stupidity, and its symptoms (foolish or stupid utterance or deed). In psychology, it is a historical term for the state or condition now called profound mental retardation.
If asking a Muslim woman not to wear face covering is 'marking her out' then I'm a monkey's uncle...that's why this guy is an 'idiot', posting inventions of his own mind. Also he is purely anti-British so if you would read him again, maybe you'll get on with him ;) Red Chief
Regardless of the quantity of cut and past you made it was a personal remark. Speedhump Yes, and deserved, as his comments were idiotic, QED it is not unreasonable to call him an idiot. It was not against you, so why are you bothered anyway. Are you turning protector of DF? I think you don't have the right qualifications....;) No, you just want to start another spat maybe.... Red Chief
Not really, Speedy. My feet are tired in kicking your dead arse. Live so far. Speedhump
Don't kid me. You can't stop yourself knocking your soft head against my brick wall of logic. Red Chief
Well-done, mate, even if it isn’t a truth. It’s the first time you gave a reply with some humor and really tough but without childish naming and your ordinary complaints against me around the forum.
I’m impressed. rudeboy
wot the fricking hell are you on about. we are discussing about women wearing hijabs in UK and you are on about criminals wearing hijabs in the ME. lol
are u british or something?? Bora Bora
First, the labour immigrants that came to the US worked to build that country. Key word: worked. I know that in my family history there are immigrants who labored to build the US. And there was no such thing as welfare at that time. Those immigrants were the ones who made that country and they became citizens. No free-bees then. You cannot compare the immigrants of then to those of now.
And it is clear that you don't have any information on the requirements to enter the US. Those from foreign countries that got instant citizenship could barely make an X for their signature, and didn't learn English. There is a difference between citizenship, which would allow one to go on public assistance, and entering legally.
The exam you are referring to: /. Obviously it is for those who want to continue with higher education and it is not an application for permanent residency. They also need to prove that they can support themselves as no government assistance is available to them. They would be applying for a temporary stay to further their education.
And yes, the US does allow migrant workers in because no one else wants to do the work, and shame on the government for turning a blind eye to these people. The government should make those collecting welfare go work on the farms and do the work that the migrants do and at least earn some of the free handout that they get all year long. If the government can put prisoners to work for pennies, they can damn well put those lazy bloodsuckers on the dole to work.
There is a big difference between entering a country legally (such as Dubai you need a visa) and entering a country legally with the intent to become a citizen, or at the very least a obtain a green card, as in the case of the US.
So, tell me, who were the laborers that built Russia? Red Chief
I’ve just remembered an interview that Italian minister of foreign affaires gave to Stephen Sackur from BBC’s “Hard Talk” program a year ago.
Stephen blamed the minister that Italian authority took fingerprints from Romanian gypsies who lived (and I believe continue living) in tent’s camps around Rome and another Italian cities illegally. Stephen called it as violation of human rights.
Italian replied that they took fingerprints only from gypsies, who don’t have any ID, for security reasons. The situation is quite similar to the one, described by RB.
Actually I like BBC in general, and Stephen with his “Hard Talk” in particular for his unbiased views on any event. So I guess that he expressed some common view on situation.
Therefore it seems like not everyone in the UK wants to humiliate somebody’s human feelings for security reasons.
Speedy it doesn’t mean that I share Stephen’s point of view. Actually I am more close to yours but you hardly call Stephen an idiot as you do with Rude Boy. Speedhump The general level of comments made on these forums by rudeboy is an indication of a level of irrational and kneejerk thinking which allows one to say that the comments are generally of an 'ídiotic' nature. They also have been very racist on occasion, against other nationalities also (as I proved to him last in another thread, quoting his words back to him, which he chose to ignore).
Stephen Sackur, although I'm not generally familiar with his work, I imagine does not normally make outrageous, biased or generally inflammatory remarks without any degree of logic being shown in his thought process. Playing the human rights card is now as common as calling people 'facist' when you don't agree with their actions (something which rudeboy does all the time here, incidentally). Childish, facile, imbecilic, idiotic; I don't really care which word you use to describe it.
I don't think there is a comparison on any level. I also find it a non-sequitur that because Sackur berates the Italians for their security scheme, he will also feel the same about disclosure of facial features in a public environment. Schools, airports, etc., etc., are all well know targets for terrorists. It just does not follow. You would need some hard proof to convince anyone of your view, Chief.
This rudeboy is not above 'humiliating' all British and Indian people (I cant recall if he has also slurred Filipinos). He deserves none of the sweet talking you would lavish on him. I think you are just making a 'straw man' for me to attack by bringing in comment of a presumably respected figure such as Sackur. ;)
I will add nothing more to this matter; if you disagree with my calling this fool 'idiotic' you are entitled to, but I suggest you spend an hour reading his posts over the last few months first.
I personally would take the fingerprints and the DNA of every gypsy living in such a camp, and ignore their 'human rights'. The level of crime close to gypsy camps in the UK speaks for itself. Tolerance has been abused for far too long. These people want to live outside of the law, pay no tax yet be given free land where they are provided with services and amenities, but pay nothing for it, and be hard to trace (for obvious reasons). They should not be allowed to do so.
Cheers. Bora Bora Come on guys, chill out. &annotation_id=annotation_712721&feature=iv Red Chief Speedy, it looks like you faced some unresolved problems after invasion of those modern nomadic tribes. They don’t want to integrate and share your values but want to share western view on “human rights” only. It’s a pity that you want to limit some human rights for security reasons. I believe that Stephen was afraid of that first move. Speedhump
Nomadic tribes are a pure anachronism in the modern world, they have no place in a tiny country where there is no space and no land which is not 'owned'. Let them live on the Steppes, no, they don't want to. They want to live where they can get colour TV and fresh running water and healthcare provided by the State for free. They are leeches on the welfare state of the UK and they are responsible for a lot of crime. You're damn right I have a 'problem' with them.
Society is about integrating, and you know it. Nobody should have a right to live in the UK for free, avoiding their responsibilities under the lie of 'we are a free people, we don't want to be tied down'.
I have a MASSIVE problem with it. National security currently has nothing to do with the gypsy problem which you raised, not me. Bora Bora Well these "squatters" as I refer to them, exist in the US as well. They are comprised of families that are generational welfare and those who "fled" their countries for fear of persecution. If they want their human rights, then they should join the human race and try contributing to society rather than taking. Welfare was meant to be a temporary means of support until people got on their feet, but for many it has been a lifestyle, compliments of the government at the expense of those who abide by the law, work and pay taxes. It really sucks when you have worked you whole life and can't get good medical care unless you pay for it, when those who contributed nothing get everything for free. Red Chief
It’s amazing. It definitely adds some charm to the discussion. You should add the sentence to your signature ASAP. We are not allowed to lose this gem. Bora Bora
Hey, jump in anytime. As far as I'm concerned, if you want to live like an animal, then I'll call you an animal. If someone wants to live like a scavenger, then as far as I'm concerned, they are an animal. They are the scurge of society.
And congratulations on constructing three proper sentences. Speedhump
This really is the root of it. Western 'socalist' systems have been abused far too long, yet any goverment which tries to tackle the problem is labelled inhumane. Any form of means of testing applicants is shouted down as degrading to them. It's wholly incredible. Red Chief I don’t think it’s a problem with migrants themselves. In general they are very motivated although not very well educated people. On the other hand they have a very limited access to welfare. Their children, citizens of appropriate respectful countries, are the problem. As I spoke with a few Germans they could accept Turks if they spoke German well, worked from 9 to 5 and paid all taxes, but as a rule they don’t do any of these. Bora Bora
Moivated to do what when you are uneducated? Plow the fields? How do they work if they are uneducated and can't speak the language. When they legally migrate to a country they generally enjoy immediate welfare benefits. Maybe some countries allow only limited access to the welfare system, but in the US they get full blown benefits.

The children become second generation welfare recipients as will their children until one of them decides he wants to be more than someone living off of welfare. Speedhump Some people come looking for a new life and will work hard. Polish immigrants to UK generally are hard working, nice, looking to make better lives for themselves. But some people come because they know they can get a free house, free schooling for children, and free health care. They know that whether they work or not, they are better off than in the country they came from. These people should be sent back home. Even UK citizens who freeload like this should not be supported. And the so-called British 'gypsy' families who want to live on permanent fixed camp sites paid for by UK citizens taxes and avoid the economic and social system except where it benefits them should be put on a boat to Franz Josef Land, with their wheelless caravans. Second and third generation immigrants are certainly a problem. Many of them feel that they don't belong in their parents' adopted country and cause massive social problems. A minority integrate into the community. Red Chief Wait, wait, Bora. I don’t have information about US but if anyone wants to immigrate to English-speaking country LEGALLY he has to pass rather difficult “IELTS” exam with high marks. Most people I saw on “IELTS preparation course” have different university degrees and worked very hard in Dubai. They also have to satisfy another very strict conditions. As for illegal migrants you know that there are a lot of job in any country, which locals don’t want to do like dustmen, harvest collector. Who fills those vacancies? Those migrants. On the other hand they don’t have ant access to welfare system at all. Bora, I’m surprised to listen this from you as soon as US has been built partly using cheap labour of immigrants. Speedhump
This is rubbish, there are no exams to pass to immigrate to the UK legally, you only need to know how to hold out your hand. Red Chief Misery Called Life To migrate to the UK you need to answer the IELTS. I applied to a couple of Brit Universities for my Masters, and becos my bachelors was from the UAE they asked me to answer the IELTS. But they were impressed with my CFA grades. Hence they've upgraded me straight to the interview round. IELTS is a piece of cake. I got 9. It was mostly nurses and students taking the IELTS if I remember right. Speedhump
I would just respectfully repeat that this is not a legal requirement to immigrate to the UK. If people need it to find work with some employers that's a totally different matter. Speedhump
I realise it's difficult for you to keep up with conversations and the way that many different factors impinge on a debate, I suggest you just start a new thread all by yourself. ;) Misery Called Life
Fair Enough. I was talking bout university. I have no idea what the requirements are for immigration.
My point was:-
To actually apply for immigration, first you have to reach UK. And to do that you need a job.For certain professions as well as for those from non English speaking countries IELTS is mandatory.
So there you go! Red Chief
IELTS has two versions - Academic or General - you can choose the version that is best for your needs. There are two kinds of reading and writing test - called modules. Both modules are held at the same time and in the same room as the listening and speaking test. When you register, you need to choose the module you want to take. Academic module - normally taken when applying for higher education or study abroad, or by doctors doing the PLAB test. The General Training module - is normally taken when applying for immigration to New Zealand, Australia or Canada. Bora Bora
And your point is? Red Chief Well, if you want to speak about that the problem of US authority is that they don’t want to make transparent and clear procedure for immigration people from their own countries. The immigration to America is closed from the most populated ones. They started issuing driving licenses to illegal Mexicans in California 2 years ago instead. The next move will possibly be accepting Spanish as the second state language. Another problem is a social security system, I think. You can see rather African Americans than fresh citizens in the dole queue. It’s very visible from TV news programs. As one black con said in “Prison Break”: “ You want welfare? You better vote Democrat…” Speedhump
Doesn't seem that this is borne out in fact, lots of interesting reading here, I'm going through it as I have time :
One of the most contentious issues in the debate over immigration reform is whether or not the presence of immigrants in the U.S. labor force—especially undocumented immigrants—has a major adverse impact on the employment prospects of African Americans. The African American community has long been plagued by high unemployment
rates, and a relatively large share of African Americans lack a college education. As a result, some commentators argue that undocumented immigrants, who tend to have low levels of formal education and to work in less‐skilled occupations, are “taking” large numbers of jobs
that might otherwise be filled by African American workers.
If this is indeed the case, one would except to find high unemployment rates among African Americans in locales with large numbers of immigrants in the labor force—especially immigrants who are relatively recent arrivals to the United States and willing to work for lower wages than most African Americans. However, data from the U.S. Census Bureau reveal that this is not the case. In fact, there is little apparent relationship between recent
immigration and unemployment rates among African Americans, or any other native‐born racial/ethnic group, at the state or metropolitan level.
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:PMY4gh1cXsMJ:%25202%2520-%2520Unemployment%2520Race%2520Disconnect%252005-19-09.pdf+us+unemployment+demographics+racial&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Rob Paral and Associates
Research and evaluation for family and community development

Rob Paral and Associates (RPA) is a consulting firm that helps not‐for‐profit and philanthropic
institutions understand the populations they serve and the impact of their programs. RPA provides
information on demographic, social, and economic characteristics of communities. rudeboy
u dont really come up with good come backs?. why dont u go and lie down on jumeriah road and act like a propa speed hump. Speedhump the site also says: "Native‐born blacks have the highest unemployment rate, at 10.4 percent as of 2008. This is 4.6 percentage points higher than the unemployment rate for the native‐born population as a whole." So tying that in with the above comments I found, although they have the highest unemployment, it doesn't actually happen specifically in areas where there is entry into the market of other immigrants. So maybe other immigrants aren't taking their jobs, they just don't want jobs? :D Speedhump
I don't fight with unarmed boys, so don't expect flames from me, I wouldn't waste them on you. Red Chief Sorry, I don’t understand what was wrong with my previous post. I cannot find in the report any digits about unemployment of recent emigrants, which disprove my statement. I continue affirming that developed welfare system, except possibly free education, is the evil for economy. Speedhump
I wasn't trying to say you are wrong, that is too big a blanket to throw. But I was pointing out a set of data that conflicts with your statement "You can see rather African Americans than fresh citizens in the dole queue. It’s very visible from TV news programs.".
By 'fresh citizens' I guess you mean recent immigrants (for sake of argument, the large number of Hispanics that arrive constantly).
The report I found seems to show that your fresh citizens do not make for higher African American unemployment. They don't take their jobs, basically, nor those of the local white population. Where both are present. I guess any TV station can take a camera to Harlem (or wherever) and find black faces outside a job office, but that's not a proper demographic statement.

I strongly disagree. Even under 'Iron Lady' Margaret Thatcher in the UK the UK social welfare was maintained, although it was under very close watch, which is fully correct. A welfare system correctly and strictly operated is a blessing on any civilised country.
Public health and education systems are even more important. Your view smells of greedy industrialists and repression of the workforce. I'm surprised to find the oppressor in you.
The UK started to introduce social welfare programs in the nineteeth century. One of the champions of workers' rights was Lord Leverhulme in his own factories and plantations, even before there was any law to support it. He was the founder of the worldwide Unilever group, a man way ahead of his times. A true social reformer and a man who loved his workers both at home and in Africa and the Far East. Read 'The King of Sunlight' from Magrudys. :)
Edit: corrected factual error, Lord Lever not Beaverbrook, ...brainfart! Speedhump While King Leopold's minions in the Congo were cutting off workers' hands and feet for dissent, Lever was building his own workers in Africa homes, schools and hospitals. Social welfare is crucial for civilisation. Red Chief The report I found seems to show that your fresh citizens do not make for higher African American unemployment. They don't take their jobs, basically, nor those of the local white population.
I didn’t talk that recent LEGAL immigrants stole some jobs of African Americans. As far as I understand it was Bora’s desire to persuade African Americans to fill some dirty vacancies. Such way she was going to convert them to the “human being race”. They obviously do not want to follow her advice. :)
The situation, when most recent immigrants are Hispanics, shows that US really can’t regulate migration as they effectively did in 1930s (by discriminating South Italians and other unwanted nations).
Now US have huge influx of low-skilled people of one nationality/(mentality) whom they will not be able to melt in American pot in the future. The practice of CA, AUS and NZ looks more reasonable. Bora Bora
I didn’t talk that recent LEGAL immigrants stole some jobs of African Americans. As far as I understand it was Bora’s desire to persuade African Americans to fill some dirty vacancies. Such way she was going to convert them to the “human being race”. They obviously do not want to follow her advice. :)
The situation, when most recent immigrants are Hispanics, shows that US really can’t regulate migration as they effectively did in 1930s (by discriminating South Italians and other unwanted nations).
Now US have huge influx of low-skilled people of one nationality/(mentality) whom they will not be able to melt in American pot in the future. The practice of CA, AUS and NZ looks more reasonable.
You piece of crap!!!! I never referred to any race in my statement. And get off the African American. African Americans are Americans - bottom line, not immigrants. That's you all over making assumptions as usual.
And if you want to know who I was referring to it was the wave of Russian immigrants that took place for years!!!! It was real heart warming to know that the money I put into social security working those years was being used to supplement welfare, because the welfare budget went bellyup because there were so many immigrants. The influx of low-skilled people of one nationality/(mentality) etc., etc., are the Russians. I guess you missed the boat when they were landing in America by the plane loads!!!
You talking about America as if you know something is like me talking about Russia - and I don't because I've never been there and have no interest in it. The only thing I know about Russia are those Russians that migrated to the US and live off of it like its a big tit.
If you are going to respond to a post may I suggest, don't read it when you are drunk, and/or don't respond when you are drunk. That would mean we would hear from you alot less. Speedhump you two are having a lot of trouble with your quote/unquotes! Bora Bora
Yeah, but he's having alot of trouble in his responses! Red Chief
Bora, if you think that I do care about those kikes you will be strongly disappointed. Thanks God, they are your problem now.
Again, it was you, not me, who jumped to my conversation with Speedy and started your xenophobic crying about US. I was not interested in continuing but you insisted.
I’m sorry; I forgot that logic isn’t a strong feature of your damaged brain.
Well. How much do you put into the US social security living permanently in the UAE? I’m just curious. Bora Bora
First, alot of those "kikes" as you refer to your countrymen are Christians, who obtained false papers to enter the US. The mere fact that you use that disgusting word shows what kind of person you are. Those "kikes" you refer to must have converted when they arrived in the US and built their Orthodox Christianity churches.
Second, posts are public. You don't own them and no one has to ask permission to post. If you don't like what you read, scan your eyes downward. And if you are going to respond, please make statements that are correct. All one has to do is to refer to the post you are referring to and see that you were probably responding while in your usual state of mind - drunk and stinking like a skunk.
Third: I insisted you continue? What, was I holding a gun to your head or did you imagine that during one of your blackouts?
Fourth, what I pay and don't pay is none of your business.
So go back into your bottle, and shut your pie hole. The rants of a drunk are getting tiresome. I don't know where SH gets the patience for you. I guess he has more compassion for the mentally challenged and weak than I do. Red Chief Bora, believe me... please... please.... There were no Christians except very old people in the former Soviet Union. Kike was a record in passport which was impossible to change. KGB released people according to this record only. Speedhump Chief, Kike is accepted generally as a very abusive and racist term. Would you call black people 'niggers'? Bora Bora
Once again you need to be directed as to what was said. I said forged documents and passports, probably supplied by the Russian Mafia. And there were plenty of Christians. Yeah, there were old people who came over using medical as an excuse, received medical care and were then classified as too sick to return home, so they stayed and went on the dole.
Do you think America is actually going to announce how many Russians migrated to the States and went on the dole?? If you lived in the States you would learn a few things about those who migrated. So if there were no Christians, how do you explain all the churches they built for themselves?
Apparently the KGB and those in power used the word "kike" the same way the word "nigger" was used to describe black Americans. You have to be extremely ignorant to think that using the word "kike" is appropriate and acceptable, especially in the year 2009. In the US the word "kike" is as unacceptable as the word "nigger". Both are racist words.
Your problem is that you think you know everything about everything. Yet, you know very little and that comes through in your posts. Speedhump Oops sorry BB, posts crossed on the same point. These word are not only unacceptable in the USA. Bora Bora
I think for the most part, any educated person would know that they are two very unacceptable words. Red Chief
Speedy, come on, of course I know the meaning. I used this word to pay some respect to Bora only.
By the way my first flame was a Jew. We were teenagers and do care rather about sex and Dostoevskiy than nationalities and religions. Bora Bora
Backpeddling are we? Show me respect? Please, spare me Boris. You don't know the meaning of respect.
And as usual, evasive when exposed as the drunken buffoon that you are known to be. GEM
Wearing abaya and niqab is 100% arab clothing traditions which has a long history. In fact word "hijab" is mentioned 7 times in Quran and NONE of the times it means "something that covers hair" so I don't understand why people claim that hijab is a must-be for muslim women. So if they try to explain their dressing-traditions with islam then it's ridiculous. Islam is a religion of freedom so there are no clothing restricitions exept 1) cover your chest (24:31), 2) they should lengthen upon themselves their outer garments (33:59) which basicly means every culture decides the look of women clothes.
It is a well-known fact that this "ghost-costume" causes identification issues in Europe. For example in Saudi they identify eachother by their purses lol.
If you're in Europe, you wear european clothes. Period. Misery Called Life Hmm GEM that sure is reason to ponder.... So basically RC thought that since BB is a Muslim he would insult the Jews and BB would join in the bashing. That's what he meant when he said that he used the word kike to pay respect to BB. Unfortunately Red Chief's conniving little stunt didn't pay off, cos BB isn't gonna stoop down to (your?) that level. Well my respect for BB has only increased post this diatribe. You tell it like it is woman! So what was the plan Red Chief? You would use the word Kike, BB would have a laugh and then you would turn around and call her racist? :D I like your manipulative ways Red Chief. Cause quite evidently you have nothing against the Jews. Am I right? Red Chief
Not really. The ki kes were and are big issue in Russia. I don't like all those Gusins ki , Berezovs ki , Hodorkovs ki , Abramovich and another thiefs. So I don't care how many of them left Russia for US or UK. Bora Bora
YOU ARE A DISGUSTING RACIST!!! Is that the kind of swill you shove down your childrens throats?
At the end of the day you and them have one thing in common - you are all Russian. And I'm talking about people who are generational Russians, with ancestry in Russia. Bora Bora
Thank you MCL. Red Chief
Tell it to Mr. Sergey Brin. I am sure that he will regret and add 20 bucks to your old-age pension. rudeboy
hate it when ppl just post bits out of the quran.
"24:31 And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss."
fact is in the home you can wear anything you like in front of your husband etc etc. but outside your home u should be covered. now i have seen many muslim women wear the salwar kameez with short sleves and even short salwars. yes they are covered but they still are revealing some of their body parts. this is wrong because when they walk in public many men will stare at them. but then again we all know which women like to reveal their body parts in public ;)
by the way if u r in europe u dont have to wear european clothes. does that mean when i am in europe i 4get my family, my name, my religion and my clothes? lol plz Speedhump
You complete dickhead. You just shot down your own argument :D :D
One's face and hands must necessarily be shown, for normal social interaction, oh unless you believe that women do not need to be understood and so it's not necessary to see their lips speak and their faces move and convey their emotions...well...I would hazard a guess that you do think that women don't need to be paid any attention to except in bed. You just proved that there's nothing in the Koran that says Muslim women have to cover their face, so why the f*ck are they screaming about this in England? I know, another chance to create unrest and stir up the peaceful Muslim majority in the UK. It's how civil disobedience and terrorism starts. Hope those words aren't too big for you..... rudeboy
listen humpty i said SHORT salwar kameez which reveals your arms and your legs. do you know what a salwar kameez is? do you want one for xmas so you can become an indian father christmas :D
2ndly islam is a religion of freedom as GEM correctly said so. in the quran there are two verses in the Quran that concern women's dress. These are Surah an-Nur verse 31 and Surah al-Ahzab verse 59. Surah an-Nur verse 31 contains two commands that particularly relate to women's dress. The first is that women shall cover all of their beauty except "what is apparent of it" around men who are not related to them. The second is that women should extend their headcoverings (khimars) to cover their bosoms. As for Surah al-Ahzab verse 59, it commands that women shall wear long, loose outergarments (jilbabs) when they go out from their houses.
yes you are right humpty (once in his lifetime) that in the quran there is no mention about a woman covering her face and hands yet so many muslim women do so.
but if humpty you had read the quran you would know that PRIVACY is very important in Islamic social code. Everything that is not necessary to be known in public should be concealed and kept private. There is an entire code of conduct that a Muslim follows in order to uphold the importance of private space and private things. Hijab is a part of this. A Muslim might desire to be especially careful in protecting privacy. This might involve using extra vigilance in guarding one's tongue and averting one's gaze, above and beyond what is required. It might also involve extra-modest dress. When a Muslim woman is already covering everything but her face and her hands and she wants to dress more modestly, the only things left for her to cover are her face and hands. Seen in this light, niqab is not "extreme", but rather is a natural extension of the principle of privacy.
why dont muslim ladies shake hands with men?
why is it that when you go to some muslim houses you will find a separation of men and women?
its all because of privacy. just an example humpty. if i welcomed you into my house (lol u wish mate :D) i would make sure that you sit separately from the women. why? cos of privacy.
fact is some women choose to cover their faces and some dont. if you dont u wont be sinned provided you are wearing something modest but if you do you are not doing anything wrong.
now lets get back to this topic before you drift off again ;).
this woman is not forced to wear it. she can take it off anytime she wants and if i am correct she said i will only take it off infront of the female teachers. so why not respect her beliefs and co operate with her so that she can show her face to the female teachers and then we can all get on with our lives? ey?
wot u say humpty? Speedhump
I already said that this is the answer. Facial recognition is a large requirement of social interaction. As is is not haram to show your face nobody in the world should be allowed to refuse to show their face when requested, in any country. If this is not a law it should be so. And please open your eyes, it doesn't just apply to Muslim women.
Excerpt from /
Last week I decided to brave Oxford Street in search of a new mobile phone. As ever I was drawn into any and every shop regardless of their expertise in telecommunications. It was a cold, damp day and I wanted to remain somewhat invisible and not be drawn into any unnecessary conversations, so I employed the trusty hoody. Hooded and snug I thought, but the reaction of the security in one large store seemed more: hooded and thug. I was approached and informed that, despite no notices or anything of that sort being displayed, hoods must not be warn in that particular store. I was soon to find out that this was a policy employed by a number of other stores I visited on the street.
++++
When society feels its values being threatened they must do what they feel right to normalise it. The world is changing.
My last word. rudeboy
humpty if a woman decides to cover her face it is because she wants abit of privacy. its not because she is going to go rob a bank :D yes terroists have even wore it to get out of trouble but they get caughty. depends how good the british police is in recognizing men in hijabs :D
secondly i always thought england waas the most free country. so where is the freedom now where a woman wants to protect her privacy when she goes out? she is willing to cooperate and show her face to female teachers. what is wrong with that? why dont the government learn from that and employ a law where only female police officers are allowed to check women with hijaabs????
mate how would u like it if your mum or sis was arrested by the police and were checked physically by male police officers? Speedhump No-one is being body searched they are being asked to show their faces, very reasonably. You are twisting the facts to make yourself sound so correct but you are telling lies. In any case body searches of women are done by women officers, by law. You see that you know nothing about this and really should stop now. Freedoms must be restricted, the world is not what it was. Grow up and understand. rudeboy
officer humpty yes u r correct that women officers search women. but how about a law stating that muslim women only reveal their faces to female officers when requested in public places?
i guess u r british thus the arogance. its ok it comes in the genes. but try to understand that the woman is willing to cooperate and show her face to the female teachers. she is not going to rob the school nor is she going to blow up the school. she just wants to pick her kids up. so why dont the female teachers confirm aside that it is the mother and let her pick the kid up?instead of blowing this out of propotion and make a huge fuss about it so that ppl who know nothing about islam in UK start hating muslims more.
read this slowly and try to understand. she is WILLING to COOPERATE AND show her face to the female teachers!!!! Speedhump not good enough. obey the laws or get out is the answer. if you consider that arrogance then more fool you, it's what we hear all the time from nationals here in the UAE ;) Red Chief Well-done, Speedy. Your iron logic is worth Iron Lady. :) rudeboy
lol hahahah i see u are a conservative supporter. hey being british i ll let you say whatever u want to say cos everyone is entitled to say whatever they want to say. but i would also add, that if UK doesnt change its foreign policies or if it doesnt learn how to adapt with muslims living in england peacefully, more bombings will occur.
by the way tell the millions of muslims living in UK to get out :D
you only hear it from the nationals here cos the brits started it in the 1960s till to date.
didnt know humpty dumpty was a fascist. dont tell me u luv margret thatcher :D she must turn u on me lad ;) Flying Dutchman
Classic! Speedhump
He's just very misguided :roll: Red Chief
As soon as we speak about immigrants in the UK, some video on the similar topic about Russia:
It was the most scandalous pre-election TV commercial on Russian TV 4 years ago.
I made some remarks although they are not really necessary.
Static picture:
Party: Motherland (number 9 in the poll sheet).
It’s a quiet residential suburb of Moscow.
A group of Southern immigrants eat watermelon on the playground, as it’s a remote Southern village.
One immigrant to a young Russian mother: Too many people came.
Middle-age Russian: Pick up all crusts and clean after you.
Old-age Russian (retired military officer): Do you understand Russian?
Static picture:
Let us clean Moscow from garbage!!! Speedhump
I can see how this would be a red-hot matter for discussion. But was it also as much an anti-youth crime piece as much as anti-immigration? You can tell me that as I couldn't tell.
People worldwide get very angry about immigrants, their lack of the same culture, rising crime rates, immigrants appearing less civilised even.
It's human nature to defend your territory. Millions of years of needing to aggressively defend the safety of your own private space can't easily be erased.
It was a well conceived advert. I admit I had a strong feeling of comradeship with the middle aged Russians. I also understand how UAE nationals must feel here living amongst their 'workforce' (the average UAE national was of course not asked by his government if he wanted the current situation).
The advert was clever work, short and very direct, appealing to the gut not to the brain. A Nationalist party? Red Chief
Way off, Speedy. You can see that immigrants are different ages, but ethnic non-Russian groups commit 90% of all crimes. Pay attention that according to dead leaves and warm clothes it’s rather cold season. Russians definitely never eat watermelon on the playgrounds (but only inside flats), especially in cold season. It’s a habit of Southern people.
It’s a big problem in Moscow too because we have more then 3 million more or less illegal working migrants from the Caucasus and Central Asia (guestarbeiters).
By the way if you like raw nature you should visit Caucasus Mountains for sure. I think Winter Olympic Games will be the best option. Chocoholic RB, what planet are you living on? No! Why should the UK bend to the wants of people of certain religions. Obey the law of the land or go somewhere else - simple as! I am sick to death of these people saying they want everything their way, wanting to implement sharia law, wanting this and that! NO! NO! NO! Go live in Saudi! Speedhump
OK I understand, thanks for the explanation. Too many developed nations have brought the 'gastarbeiter' problem upon themselves. National boundaries are broken in so many ways, mostly by big business and money. It's hard to see some 'Nation States' lasting until the next century in anything other than name without another World War.
Yes Sochi for the Olympics. I could enjoy that. I'd been thinking to go to Prague if they win, I have been there in winter and it's so pretty (but not 'raw':D) Red Chief
There is even rawer a little bit further but I believe it will be too raw and insecure for you. My friend from those places offered me the unforgetable trip to Elbrus (the highest peak in Europe 6500 meters) but only in a company of 5 people with AKM. :)
Abkhazia (in 50 km from Sochi) is very savage and beautiful. :) mesheditor
fresh statement. whatchue doing over the weekend ? :lol: kanelli rudeboy, let me explain in simple words... In Western cultures, as well as other cultures, it is not acceptable to hide ones face during social interactions. Why should male teachers in that school have to hide somewhere so that the lady can walk around the school halls and in the meetings without wearing her veil? Like I said earlier, she should just send her husband to deal with school matters if she can't handle being without her veil. rudeboy
sheesh talk about freedom to do whatever u want to do in the west. reading some of the posts of western expats has disgusted me.
male teachers do not have to hide. she wants to pick her kids up. she is covering her face because of a religious belief. do you not understand that? she is not a terroist. a MOTHER of a kid who goes in a school. she just wants to pick her kids up and go. she is willing to show her face to the female teachers. why doesnt she show her face to men? because she doesnt want to. its called PRIVACY and thats her belief & part of religious rights.
yeh kanelli she could send her hubby. but we dont know what her situation is. maybe her hubby is not in the country. maybe her hubby works.
I am sorry but I am disgusted to read what you guys had to say. you talk about how UAE is backwards. A woman who wants to cover her face because of her will wants to go pick her kids up and is willing to co-operate. but apparantely some expats living in dubai think she should be told to go back to her country.
my god i feel like swearing (#$(#$*#($*#($*#( bunch of fascits.
talking about how freedom of rights exist in the west. MY ASS it does. rudeboy lol let me guess a muslim man is not allowed to grow a beard cos his face is covered and poses a threat to the country. fascists on rise in UK. oh by the way if you dont like UAE laws you can bloody all piss off to :D uaekid
So now you know how I feel about most of you in DF!!
I'm sorry isn't this what you all want from UAE? review DF threads especially your posts choc, you want everything your way or the western way just like most of the rest, you simply cannot respect our culture or the way we do things here, you see your behavior and life style is the one that should be applied world wide you see things only from your perspective and question every dam thing. You should be the last one to give the statement above.
In case you forgot, this is a Muslim country no diff from Saudi at least this is how IT"S ppl see it so if you want more of freedom you should go back to UK. Not bcz UAE is giving a bit of freedom for you then you should go for it, that’s if you care how it’s ppl feel about it or what it’s religion says about it but you wouldn’t know about that.
now regarding what is being discussed between rude boy and speedhums,the way I see it is that it’s a one woman choice to cover or not it's the freedom they have been giving from their religion and culture no matter where , isn't this what freedom is all about ? But if it's for a security reason then yes they simply have to go along with the visited country laws or simply stay home. But if it’s just a school student matter I can’t see what is the big deal. Speedhump
You are making stuff up again, it makes you look more stupid.
And no, sorry, in the west there is not freedom to do 'whatever you like'. Sure you can practise your religion, just like Christians are allowed to practise here. You can't just 'decide' how to act exactly as you want, so you can't run around outside mosques waving swords, or killiing your sister because she has slept with a man, as both happen on occasions in the UK when Muslims get a little excited with each other, and you also can't go around unrecognisable in situations where it is not acceptable. Schools are places in the West where security is now considered very important and I'm surprised you don't know that (well, in truth I'm not).
If you don't like the expats here I suggest you ask the Government of the UAE to stop inviting them. UAEkid knows that expats have been encouraged to come here in their droves because they are important to the UAE's development, and to get them here the UAE has had to accept that certain western ways of living will be practised here (in controlled environments, bars, clubs, beaches). In fact many young Emiratis embrace large parts of this way of life.
The Government sets the boundaries, and if expats go over them then they should expect to be punished. If they don't exceed the tolerance given, then expats living their own lifestyle here must plainly be accepted AS THE WISH OF THE GOVERNMENT.
And one more thing for the pair of you, stop blanketing us all. I don't speak for 'westerners' or 'expats' I speak for myself alone. There are others posting here like this new idiot crusader who plainly is anti-Muslim. Peope like Sage, DesertDude, and others don't criticise the UAE and you also know nothing about their lifestyles here. You know VERY WELL that there are always quite a few expats posting here disapproving of bikinis in the street, drunkenness in public, and other bad imports from other countries. Stop taking the comments you don't like on the forums and blindly applying their words to everyone.
Thanks. chevaliers-de-sion
The above should be enforced more passionately in the free world Speedhump You know crudeboy, I think you should try this, I think your problem is that you're just a little short on love. :D
rudeboy humpty she is willing to cooperate i.e show her face to the female teachers so that they can confirm that she is the mother of the child. would a terroist cooperate with you? we are not talking about the country here. we are talking about a school, a mother and her kid. and kido dont be cheap by having shots at my luv life. Speedhump Around and around and around. we may as well stop as everything has been said about ten times now. Of course I don't know about your love life, but seems my bullet hit your heart (or somewhere lower) :D rudeboy
humpty thats WHAT i have been trying to tell you but I guess it takes time for you to understand. its ok u did fall on your head on your birth hench the name humpty dumpty :D
bro read my nick and read it again and then you will understand why I dont get bothered by your childish come backs.
honestly do some homework before coming online and opeing your mouth. I am an indian and your certainly made a fool out of yourself.
if you want me to stop calling you humpty let me know. I am a nice guy honestly. or if you dont like being called speedhumps of jumeriah road let me know alrite. I am willing to COOPERATE meaning i aint a terroist :D Speedhump I don't mind at all what you call me. Go for your life. You get kicks out of insulting people, we have all seen it in your posts ;) You have just been repeating yourself ad infinitum, I am the one who has been coming up with different ways to try to explain why you are so wrong. Anyway, I've said it all now. That's me done. rudeboy
bro no1 is wrong. i have always said and will say it again we live in a world where east vs west. and just by reading the post everyone can figure that there is certainly a clash of civilizations.
you might think you are right. but ask any muslim about this scenario and they will say it was wrong. UAEKID is one example who said it was wrong for them to do this to a mother in a school.
life is not about proving others to be wrong. life is about learning and adapting. Chocoholic Yes, the UAE is different from Saudi Kid, in the fact that it is liberal - might I remind that I lived there for 4 years! So I very well know the difference. You see you're the one who wants everything your way. I fully respect the cultural needs of the UAE, but when another country asks you to abide by it's rules (the UK is NOT a muslim state!) then you say no g. As far as I'm concerned you're the unbendable one. kanelli Hmm, so growing a beard is the same as wearing a veil over the face so that only eyes (and sometimes not even the eyes) are showing? Wow, your intellect astounds me rudeboy! Who said anything about the woman being a terrorist? Can we cut the bullshit about the "terrorist" stereotyping already? The UK is not a Muslim country. There are school rules about entering school premises while masking your identity. The woman was not simply picking her kids up, but was also interacting with school staff for meetings etc. The rule is for security of staff and students, and it isn't made for the purpose of marginalizing Muslim women who wear a full veil. Just as some of you complain here about people going against the rules in the UAE, we can complain when people try to go against the rules in our countries. Isn't that fair? I just love it how we are all expected to abide by the rules here, but just because we are more liberal in the West we are always expected to change our rules to accommodate every group out there. It just isn't realistic. rudeboy
kanelli u have said it yourself it is a school and the SCHOOLS law. yes muslims living in UK should abide with the countrys law. but schools law crazy as such? sorry they dont make sense to me.
no i dont want to make things go my way. i am trying my best to educate you ppl about islam. its a sad face that you guys arent willing to learn.
kanelli i was being sarcastic about the beard but give osama a clean shave. tell me would you be able to recognize him?
i dont have anything else to say about this matter cos the fact is you guys arent willing to understand nor learn about the hijab.
peace Speedhump everyone knows about hijab, it's not rocket science. boring already. rudeboy
bro u didnt know about the hijab & islam and certainly didnt know what a shalwar kameez is. Speedhump I knew it all. I'm from London, I'm a lot more cosmopolitan than you, you short trousered nit. rudeboy didnt know that you had to be from london to know everything. well old chap i congrulate u for being a londoner :D frengi Speedhump At last you see sense. Much as I'd love to carry on talking your particular brand of drivel all night I have some reading to do. rudeboy
reading what i have posted :D uaekid
Exactly what I mean ,in your tearm islam is not liberal , you don’t wana see KSA or respect it as a country that applies the islamic laws . on other hand since UAE is letting you drink then it is liberal. Liberality has nothing to do with wrong doing in it’s islamic laws. You see where I’m going with this ? but hey it’s your choice after all how to see things. kanelli rudeboy, the school's rules don't make any sense to you? What if everyone turned up with their faces covered when coming onto school premises? How do the teachers know who is who and whether children are being picked up by their parents or caregivers or by some stranger? In light of attacks on schools, do you think that adults should have the right to enter schools while masking their face? By the way, other countries have laws about masking identity. For example, if you want to publicly protest in Finland you can do so, but cannot mask your face while doing it. Do you think that is unfair and infringing on the rights of protesters? Once again, Islam is a minority religion in other countries and there is no obligation for schools etc. to make exceptions about masking identity. RobbyG
True, so true.
In our EU society, only criminals mask themselves, because the rest show themselves out in the open.
We are expressive :D rudeboy
i guess you guys havent read the part where it mentions the mum is willing to cooperate . i dont know how many times i have said that :S its like banging my head against the wall with you guys :D
kanelli if a school has laws like this thats fine provided they are implemented properly and are fair and show respect to certain religions.
in a school they should have a seperate room where the mum can show her face to the female security guards or female teachers, so that they can confirm it is a mother and not a loose canon with guns.
a person doesnt have to cover his/her face to kill students. we all know this and we all have seen this in USA and parts of Europe.
so really is covering your face a security threath? or giving kids & strangers access to guns and arms?
anyone can be a terroist and blow up a school. you can have a crazy student who could decide one they he would blow himself up. how do you protect the school then? kanelli Of course people can attack a school without masking themselves. If they are going to commit suicide after the attack they likely don't care about masking their identity. If a person wants to flee the scene or kidnap a child, then masking their identity is exactly the way they would want to go when perpetrating their crime. I'd like to point out that masking identity causes distrust and suspicion in many cultures where it isn't the norm for one gender to cover their faces in public on a daily basis. It has nothing to do with Islam or scaremongering about Islamic terrorism, just a cultural difference.



Dubai Forum | Paris Forum | Vegan Forum | Brisbane Forum | 3D Forum | Classified Jobs in Dubai | Listings of Jobs in London | London classified ads Portal
| © 2021 Dubai Forums | Privacy policy