Posted on 08/25/2006 4:10:48 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter
26 August 2006
By MARTIN KAY
National MP Bob Clarkson's mouth has landed him in trouble again after he said "Islam religion-type people" who wore burqas could be crooks hiding guns.
The Tauranga MP, who is known to shoot from the lip, said Muslim women should not wear the full-body veils if they wanted to "fit into our country".
"Even walking down the street, to a certain extent, how do we know there's not a crook with a gun hiding under a burqa? Who's under that gown?" he said.
He was tolerant of all religions, but Muslims who wore burqas because of deeply held beliefs should "go back to Islam or Iraq".
The comments, made days after a major diversity forum in Wellington, brought an angry reaction from Federation of Islamic Associations president Javed Khan.
He said the comments were "ignorant and arrogant" and singled out a small section of the community.
Clarkson's call for Muslim women to stop wearing burqas came in an interview with the Dominion Post and followed comments he made in Palmerston North on Thursday.
"I do have a bit of a problem with Islam religion-type people wearing scarves and burqas around the place. I think people should fit into the country," he said in Palmerston North.
The comments show Clarkson, who will host a Good Jokers Unite night in Upper Hutt next week, is not tempering his style. He told Parliament this week that he was "p..... off" he could not hear what was being said, and during last year's election campaign, National leader Don Brash had to order him to stop talking about his testicles.
Clarkson said the burqa comments were directed at two Muslim women who had to be ordered to remove their veils in court, and the word "scarves" had somehow "slipped in".
He did not think Muslim women should wear burqas in public because it indicated they were not prepared to fit into New Zealand.
He also took a swipe at gays and lesbians and said he was not enjoying being an MP because Government MPs were "liars, cheats and bloody crooks".
"I've got nothing against homosexuals and lesbians as long as they're doing it in their own house, but if you try to ram it down my throat, look out," he said.
Khan said: "If he is tolerant of all types of religion, why is he picking on Muslims wearing scarves and burqas? Would he have any problems with nuns wearing the same type of clothes, head covers and long skirts? Would he have problems with the Sikhs wearing turbans? When he says that people should fit into the country, what does that mean? That they should go in their bikinis?"
Women who wore burqas often did so for cultural, rather than religious, reasons.
Brash said National was not interested in what people wore, provided they shared "bedrock values" such as religious and personal freedom and sexual equality.
Chris Finlayson, National's only gay MP, said he agreed with everything Clarkson had said.
Can we get him to move to the Sheeple's Republic of FloriDUH and run for governor?
PLEEEEEZE!
Sikhs are't running about killing people and being a pain in civilizations A$$ like muslims
An extremely poor choice of language given the context!
They should were thongs instead.
When at the beach or pool, YES!!!
Burkas should be banned. They are a symbol of hatred and death.
LOL!!
Bag 'em, Achmed.
Let's see. . . how many nuns have been involved in terrorist attacks, plane hijackings, homicide bombings, and killing innocent civilians?
I love the way this guy talks. Finally, someone willing to speak the truth about Muslims.
> An extremely poor choice of language given the context!
LOL! I re-read the phrase, and my mind just boggled!
Nice to see someone in National saying something of note.
I prefer Rodney Hyde and Deborah Coddington personally.
> I prefer Rodney Hyde and Deborah Coddington personally.
Hmmmm. Yes, the ACT party, whose logo describes itself as "The Liberal Party". It would be difficult for your to get visibility over their activities from overseas -- here is how matters currently sit:
Rodney is currently the leader of ACT, and his main accomplishments-of-note recently have been to appear on TV's "Dancing with Stars" and a celebrity spelling bee. Having fought hard to win his Epsom electorate this past election, he has done next-to-nothing in Parliament since.
Deborah Coddington is no longer with ACT, or indeed in Parliament, having resigned at the last election. Her main claim-to-fame was to vote in favor of the Civil Unions Bill, switching sides to allow the controversial Labour bill to become Law of the Land, allowing something that is not-quite-marriage but carries equally all the perquisites to any couple of any sexual persuasion to be legally recognized. Another erosion of traditional family values.
Our Prime Minister is on record as having said that if the option were open to her at the time, she would have had a civil union rather than a marriage.
(see: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=9002379 )
She is currently working for the MSM as a journalist for the NZ Herald, writing a column on Sunday.
Huge disappointments.
Aside from Rodney, only Heather Roy sits in Parliament with ACT. In her spare time, she trained with the New Zealand Territorial Armed Forces (your equivalent is National Guard) and is a volunteer, part-time Citizen Soldier, as well as a very effective member of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition in Parliament.
I knew both Rodney and Deborah, but haven't spoken to either in a few years, so thanks for the update.
Deborah was always more Libertarianz but wanted more to get in the Beehive so she switched.
> I knew both Rodney and Deborah, but haven't spoken to either in a few years, so thanks for the update.
My pleasure. I worked with Stephen Franks on a couple law-and-order initiatives toward the end of the last Parliament, and still keep in touch with him. ACT was nearly destroyed by the last election: would have been wiped out except for Rodney Hide winning in Epsom.
I'm hoping they can regroup, renew, and live to fight another day because most of their policies align closely with what I believe in. I don't know why they call themselves "Liberals" because they more closely align with Canada's Reform Party.
The difference is that nun's habits & sikh turbans don't cover one's face in anyway while burka's do. Burka are more like KKK gear and people have every right to be concerned about who might actually be underneath.
> Burka are more like KKK gear and people have every right to be concerned about who might actually be underneath.
I particularly don't like the messages that wearing the burqa sends out. It degrades women, and it degrades men. Modern western democratic societies aren't about degrading anybody. It is a concept that does not fit.
If they cannot adapt a medaeval mindset to fit within a modern context and framework (liberty and democracy), then it is too much to ask them to try to fit in: it's unfair, in fact, to do so.
LOL! Is *that* what they look like under their burqas??? Crikey! I've changed my mind: keep 'em covered, lads! It's OK -- really!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.