, I wasn't trying to say that all
the men here were against the testimony of those wearing the niqab, but rather, those who do oppose, seemed to be all men. I did note your stance on the issue, so I wasn't trying to single you out, or anything. I hope I didn't give that impression. (And I really wish you would stop using the term 'Islamic country(ies)', because there are none that exist in the present. However, I do intend to answer your responses to my explanations from earlier [if you want], in a new thread, but I need some time to collect sources.)
Also, people shouldn't assume that because someone wears the niqab, that they're an immigrant. Half of the munaqabaat in Canada that I know are actually white Canadians, who were born here, who have grown up here, and whose family lineages in Canada go back at least 3 generations. The other half are mostly Canadians who are the children of immigrants to this country, with a few actually being immigrants themselves.
On top of that, I don't know if any of you have been victims of rape or sexual assault, but I was one of the latter several years ago. Anyways, when I imagine being forced to take off the niqab by a judge if I needed to testify about something that would be very important to me, the feeling I get is the same one I received when the guy attempted to rape me. So I think forcing this munaqabah, who is testifying against two men that she is accussing of sexually assaulting her many years ago, to take off her niqab, which she is obviously not comfortable with (nor would I be), is essentially like assaulting her all over again. I believe the term that is commonly is used is 'revictimisation'; which is what Mr. Weisman is doing in this case, whether intentionally or unintentionally.