Stephen Harper’s anti-niqab rhetoric helps terrorist recruiters

[Johnnny]

Glad we agree.

Harper should follow the law then.

So without being vague you agree with my stance on having to remove the facial wear for government identification?

 

[mentalfloss]

Of course, if it's for security reasons, we all agree.

I just don't agree with fear mongering which implies women can't wear certain things in other situations like taking their kids to the zoo or during a citizenship ceremony.

 

[Johnnny]

Of course.

I just don't agree with fear mongering which implies women can't wear certain things in other situations like taking their kids to the zoo or during a citizenship ceremony.

cool, thanks

 

[mentalfloss]

No worries.

Then you would agree that in situations that don't involve identification, it would be egregious to ban such clothing, right?

 

[Johnnny]

No worries.

Then you would agree that in situations that don't involve identification, it would be egregious to ban such clothing, right?

If the situation doesn't require identification than there is no reason to take it off. Yes i agree

 

[mentalfloss]

If the situation doesn't require identification than there is no reason to take it off. Yes i agree

Well then, you might be concerned that our government is trying to do just that by circumventing existing laws which allow the garb to be worn during the oath. There are no security issues and no difficulty saying the oath during this ceremony.

Despite these facts, the government is ramping up islamaphobic rhetoric, not only to get that law changed, but implying that women cannot wear certain clothing in everyday life.

 

[gerryh]

Well then, you might be concerned that our government is trying to do just that by circumventing existing laws which allow the garb to be worn during the oath. There are no security issues and no difficulty saying the oath during this ceremony.

Despite these facts, the government is ramping up islamaphobic rhetoric, not only to get that law changed, but implying that women cannot wear certain clothing in everyday life.

There's no implying anything here. It's straight forward. Remove the niqab while taking the oath. She did it, in public, to have her drivers license done. She has stated it is about "comfort". So get off the "religious" or "cultural" bandwagon.

 

[Colpy]

Stephen Harper’s anti-niqab rhetoric helps terrorist recruiters

Taylor said Harper is fuelling anti-Muslim sentiment and that, in turn, makes alienated Muslim Canadians easier targets for recruitment by radical Islamist terrorists.

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper was accused Saturday of playing into the hands of terrorist recruiters with inflammatory comments about the face-covering veil worn by some Muslim women.

The accusation came from renowned philosopher Charles Taylor, who co-chaired Quebec’s 2007 commission on reasonable accommodation of cultural and religious minorities.

Taylor said Harper is fuelling anti-Muslim sentiment and that, in turn, makes alienated Muslim Canadians easier targets for recruitment by radical Islamist terrorists.

“Ask yourself what are the recruiters for Islamic State saying? They’re saying (to Muslims), ‘Look, they despise you, they think that you’re foreign, you’re dangerous, you’re not accepted here, so why don’t you come with us?’” Taylor said following a speech to the annual summit of the Broadbent Institute, a social democratic think-thank.

“The more you make it sound like that (is true), the more you’re helping them. And it’s strange that people don’t see this.”

Harper has said it’s “offensive” for women to wear the face-covering niqab when taking the oath of citizenship. And he’s called the niqab the product of an “anti-women” culture.

Last week, Conservative backbencher Larry Miller was forced to apologize after saying women who insist on wearing a veil during the citizenship ceremony should “stay the hell where they came from.” Harper’s office called the comment “inappropriate” but the prime minister himself has not weighed in.

Opinion polls suggest a majority of Canadians agree with Harper, a development Taylor called “a ridiculously disproportionate reaction” to the “tiny” number of women who wear the niqab in Canada.

Nevertheless, he said the reaction is understandable given the furor over Islamic terrorism.

“We’re in a context where Islamaphobia is very powerful in the West,” he said.

“It’s perfectly understandable emotionally. We have to get over it and the worst and the last thing we need is for our political leaders to surf on it and encourage it.”

Taylor said Harper seems “tone deaf” to the dangerous impact his rhetoric can have, although he said it also seems to be a deliberate tactic to whip up support in the run-up to the next federal election, scheduled for October.

He called on all political leaders to show restraint, even if it costs them votes, rather than risk “terrible damage” to Canadian society.

Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau has been criticized by Conservatives, NDP Leader Tom Mulcair and two prominent Jewish groups for suggesting that Harper is employing the kind of rhetoric that historically triggered some of Canada’s most shameful episodes of bigotry, including the “none is too many” approach to Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi Germany in the 1930s and 40s.

But Taylor said the stereotyping and stigmatization of Muslims today is “sociologically very, very similar” to that faced by Jews in the past.

“This kind of scapegoating, alas, we see this throughout human history ... We’ve got to fight it wherever it comes up, no quarter. This is something we can give not an inch to, not a centimetre to.”

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/canada/2015/03/28/stephen-harpers-anti-niqab-rhetoric-helps-terrorist-recruiters-charles-taylor-says.html?referrer=https:%2F%2Fwww.google.ca%2F

Taylor, like philosophers everywhere, is simply not dealing with reality.

It goes with the territory.

I do not think that saying ".....the niqab is the product of an anti-woman culture" (a simple statement of fact) drives anyone to radicalization and murder. That is a bit of a leap in logic, don't you think?

And, if such a statement of fact does drive people to radicalization and terrorism, perhaps we should not let the followers of such an insane cult into the country, as they obviously can not deal with anything foreign to their own culture.

Taylor is an idiot.

Simply reinforces my view of philosophy.

True Story.

Many years ago I'm sitting at the bar in the little pub at UNB-SJ.
It is about 2 in the afternoon. A couple of seats down there is a guy so drunk he appears to be passed out. His head is down on the bar.

An acquaintance calls to me from a nearby table "Colpy, have you got a Introduction to Philosophy textbook?"

"Philosophy", I reply, "is bull****. It is either so obvious it is redundant or so obscure it is irrelevant"

The passed out guy raises his head, looks at me, applauds briefly, and collapses back down onto the bar.

I ask Larry, the bartender "Who is that?"

"Oh, that's Dr. Langham, the Philosophy professor"

Says it all.

 

[Colpy]

So tell me, are Harper's comments "dangerous" because they will inspire the peace loving Muslims to attempt to murder him for the third time?

A question stolen from a poster on another site, but such a wonderful question.....poor dumba$$ Taylor would be left speechless.....we hope.

 

[taxslave]

Well then, you might be concerned that our government is trying to do just that by circumventing existing laws which allow the garb to be worn during the oath. There are no security issues and no difficulty saying the oath during this ceremony.

Despite these facts, the government is ramping up islamaphobic rhetoric, not only to get that law changed, but implying that women cannot wear certain clothing in everyday life.

Nice spin. If Harper is doing something illegal by making women show their faces for the citizenship ceremony then it is the law that needs changing, not Harper. Same as if they were in court. Or in a bank. What they wear in the privacy of their own home is their business.

 

[skookumchuck]

It's called a joke.

Stop being such a politically correct rightie tightie.


How are we going to stop women from wearing a niqab?

Who cares if they wear them? Certainly not any majority, not even close. The question was why did the female want to wear it during a citizenship ceremony? Just to "teach us a lesson" ? Fuk them! We have had a very fine country only because we did not fly by their rules. btw, where were the muzzies during the beginnings of Canada? Not here that is for sure.
Flossie, if you and your progressive friends want us to be just like all the countries that now have a serious problem with muslims you need to move there so fuk off.

 

[Locutus]

the star and flossie...

they're like the wacky waving inflatable arm flailing tube men.

 

[mentalfloss]

There's no implying anything here. It's straight forward. Remove the niqab while taking the oath. She did it, in public, to have her drivers license done. She has stated it is about "comfort". So get off the "religious" or "cultural" bandwagon.

You keep getting upset at me for something which is the law.

It's not my problem you want it broken.

Sorry.

the star and flossie...

they're like the wacky waving inflatable arm flailing tube men.

The mod who trolls.

 

[Sal]

he's definitely alienating Muslims, who make up over 3% of Canada's population.

what kind of Muslims is he alienating...not the moderates that's for certain, the rest, we don't need

It's called a joke.

Stop being such a politically correct rightie tightie.


How are we going to stop women from wearing a niqab?

only when we are capable of showing them we can support and protect them from harm

until then, say hello to that tent covered woman

 

[mentalfloss]

What is it that people have against the law?

Why is it so difficult for people to accept our justice system in this country?

Earlier this month, a Federal Court judge ruled that a portion of the law requiring would-be citizens to remove their face coverings while taking the oath of citizenship was unlawful.

Trudeau: Harper's Rationale For Appeal Of Niqab Ruling Unjustified

 

[Sal]

Of course, if it's for security reasons, we all agree.

I just don't agree with fear mongering which implies women can't wear certain things in other situations like taking their kids to the zoo or during a citizenship ceremony.

you so don't get this

but you want to pretend you do

 

[mentalfloss]

you so don't get this

but you want to pretend you do

Say something useful.

 

[captain morgan]

You keep getting upset at me for something which is the law.

It's not my problem you want it broken.

Sorry.

It must really upset you that Trudeau-Lite has stepped into this big pile so deeply.

Majority of Canadians and I presume the majority of Canadian women side with Harper on this issue... It's looking that Justine has lost himself yet another segment of the electorate demographic for this upcoming election.

It won't come as a surprise to me that Justine will be beat so bad that he'll be begging to return as a substitute dwama teacher in the next year or so

 

[Sal]

Say something useful.

seriously? that is how you respond to me on this?

after all that I have written on this, I have received not one single thought from you that wasn't "feeling" generated or defensive...so really on this particular issue in my estimate you deserve nothing less than I have given you...

you are hanging from a thread here mentalfloss...I often support your thoughts but with this one you are out of your depth, and your defensive response is proof of that and you refuse to admit it, thus my respect for your opinion on this is nil as it is backed by nothing

so I say to you speak to some Muslim women in YOUR community and then bring it here

 

[Locutus]

The mod who trolls.

huh...and I thought you'd be able to take criticism like a man.