You have commented 339 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
Submit your comments on this article
Britain
Blair calls veils "a mark of separation"
2006-10-18
Prime Minister Tony Blair stepped into the debate over the integration of Muslims into British society on Tuesday, calling the full veil worn by some Muslim women "a mark of separation".

“I think we do need to confront this issue about how we integrate people properly with our society and all the evidence is when people do integrate more they achieve more as well.”
The use of the veil has prompted a lively debate over social inclusion with some leaders of Britain's 1.8 million Muslims accusing the government of stirring up Islamophobia. The radicalisation of some young British Muslims, rammed home in July last year when British-born Muslim suicide bombers killed 52 people on London transport, has raised doubts over whether enough has been done to integrate Muslims.

Blair, who has until now encouraged the debate on integration without expressing an opinion on veils, came the closest he has to taking sides. Asked if a woman who wore the veil could make a full contribution to society, Blair said: "It is a mark of separation and that's why it makes other people from outside the community feel uncomfortable. No one wants to say that people don't have the right to do it -- that's to take it too far -- but I think we do need to confront this issue about how we integrate people properly with our society and all the evidence is when people do integrate more they achieve more as well."
Posted by:Fred

#25  The Pat act is definitely under donk attack as is the entire GWOT. That's why every November counts.

But, yes, I am satisfied that the admin has the legal tools it needs to protect us without giving it intrusive access into our private lives that is sure to be abused by a Clinton as they did abuse the FBI's files.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-10-18 20:27  

#24  No jury, no nullification. The jury is a check and balance on the l;ifetime judges like the A$$ who gave Lynne Stewart 30 months, which will come t0o 24 months with good behaviour.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-10-18 20:24  

#23  liberalhawk wants to be able to hold his high when they slit his throat.
Posted by: Clkethel OHlkdj   2006-10-18 19:59  

#22  Jeeez Mr James. 90 percent on target, but man when the info stops you get weirder than me (and that's a lot, I got this Judge Crater thing figured out).
Posted by: Shipman   2006-10-18 18:19  

#21  How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."

Winston Churchill
Posted by: Bright Pebbles in Blairistan   2006-10-18 16:39  

#20  I would like to abolish the jury system. First, it is theater. Cute, good for writing novels about, but theater. Second, I understand that the new MRI lie detector can spot a lie every time.
Why not train judges to run lie detectors the correct way, and bring in the perps one by one.
We may not get them all, but I believe we will be able to separate the liers from the truth tellers.
Congress first, lawyers second, then work out a schedule for the perps and criminals.
Posted by: wxjames   2006-10-18 15:26  

#19  Damn right November matters. It always has. November mattered in 1992 bigtime. I place much of the direct blame for 9/11 squarely on the clown who was too busy getting his pole waxed to kill Bin Laden and his ilk.

Sometimes the elecotrate's thinking is crystalized, and sometimes, complacency reigns. I'll be there. To hell with those who won't be.
Posted by: mcsegeek1   2006-10-18 12:09  

#18  I detect a note of smugness, almost complacency there, NS. The tools for catching or thwarting the jihadis is under partisan Judicial and DhimmiDonk attack, no?

November matters. A lot.
Posted by: .com   2006-10-18 11:45  

#17  Patriot Act is partially RICO applied to Terrs. Together with SigInt access, and probably an unacknowledged amount of luck, it has kept us safe for 5 years. If the Judge had done the job properly there wouldn't be a Stewart problem.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-10-18 11:41  

#16  Did you make a case in there - or did you just say "shit happens"?

Prosecuting the mob - as the mob - is something that began with Thomas E. Dewey in 1936. Are you sincerely holding that up as an example of how effective the law enforcement approach is?

And that begs the question of whether investigative resources and methods used for prosecuting the mafia actually make much sense or have much in common with cell-oriented jihadis.

I'm persuaded of two things: they are two different animals and it has been more finger in the dike than any sort of sweeping victory for justice.

We disagree. You can type faster, but that doesn't mean dick. The facts are that this isn't about graft, money, but about the destruction of the US, the annihilation of freedom, and the instillation of global sharia. Pardon me if I am inclined to be a tad more proactive about defending America than trusting the Fumblin' Fibbies.

The LE model is, indeed, our time-honored approach, but it is woefully outgunned, outmanned, and outmoneyed in the WoT - not to mention the judiciary is thoroughly fucked - that was a Clintoonian asshat that let Stewart off in his misty-eyed halfwit decision.

Not good enough.
Posted by: .com   2006-10-18 11:37  

#15  The jury is not the problem: they found her guilty on all five counts. The judge is the problem: he could have sentenced her to 30 years but he chose two years and four months. Two years and four months for material support to terrorists. Bah! Bring on the tribunals.
Posted by: Darrell   2006-10-18 11:37  

#14  Stewart was a Clinton judge error, not a jury error. Yes, I would like to get rid of all Clinton judges.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-10-18 11:37  

#13  "It's very effective, too "

damn straight it is, in the hands of an effective prosecutor. Rudy Giuliani tore apart the 5 families, entirely using constitutional procedures.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2006-10-18 11:25  

#12  She was convicted, and will go to prison.

Was her sentence too light? Perhaps. Juries make mistakes. Not just in terror related trials. Do you care to abolish the jury system? Would you have had Lynne Stewart tried by a military tribunal?

Why not just suspend the whole Bill of Rights for the duration?
Posted by: liberalhawk   2006-10-18 11:24  

#11  Yup, I'm not surprised that would be your approach. It's very effective, too - just consider Lynne Stewart.
Posted by: .com   2006-10-18 11:05  

#10   "Magik Filter to be invented... y'know, the one that can discriminate between mafiosi, active supporters, passive supporters, and the "leave me out of it" types. Since omerta is a staple of Sicilian culture, it even becomes tougher."

I would suggest that investigation, policework, due process of law, juries, trials, etc are our most tried and true methods. (and yup they wont work in all cases which is why I support military tribunals, and detention for folks caught on the field of battle)



Posted by: liberalhawk   2006-10-18 11:00  

#9  I'm still waiting for the Magik Filter to be invented... y'know, the one that can discriminate between jihadis, active supporters, passive supporters, and the "leave me out of it" types. Since taqiyya is a staple of Islam, it even becomes tougher.

I gave my view in this thread, comment #33, so I won't repeat it all.
Posted by: .com   2006-10-18 10:54  

#8  I have to disagree a tad, JFM. There were decent Germans, for sure, but decent Nazis? Maybe those who joined the party because it was required to get/keep their jobs, but anyone who willing joined the party was suspect, at best.

There are many decent, even admirable Arabs, Syrians, Persians, and so on. But if they have more than a nominal following of Islam, I don't think they can be decent.
Posted by: Jackal   2006-10-18 10:47  

#7  Has anyone ever seen Fred an Cheney in the same room?

I rest my case.
Posted by: .com   2006-10-18 09:11  

#6  Imean, who's the most connected to the Halliburton Global Conspiracy?
Posted by: anonymous5089   2006-10-18 09:09  

#5  But mostly Fred.
Posted by: anonymous5089   2006-10-18 09:08  

#4  Yep, Fred and the Pope.
Posted by: Shipman   2006-10-18 08:11  

#3  
It's late and I'm tired. I still believe that good and evil is an individual characteristic not related to ethnicity or religion -

Just as they were good Nazis who helped old women to cross the street, who hadn't read Mein Kampf and, even if itr sounds incredible, helped Jews to escape (several recorded cases). But while there were good Nazis, Nazism, the ideology was evil.
Posted by: JFM   2006-10-18 07:57  

#2  I blame the Pope.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-10-18 06:49  

#1  well, I'll be. The tide has turned. Looks like the Ghoul Sack is going to be the focal point. And a good one it is.

It's late and I'm tired. I still believe that good and evil is an individual characteristic not related to ethnicity or religion - but radical Islam is completely incompatible with our western freedoms and that they force women to walk around in black sacks pretty much says it all. Muslims who wish to live in the West and be good neighbors better get their stuff together really fast and help our security services rid the extremists out of their midst - because I'm about as tolerant as it gets, and my patience is nearly exhausted.

While they may have found a temporary kinship with our liberal hate-mongers - they should be aware that many, if not most, of those people will be the first to viciously turn on them.
Posted by: anon   2006-10-18 06:18  

00:00