Posted on 10/17/2006 9:54:24 PM PDT by MadIvan
Britons gave overwhelming backing last night to a call for a ban on full-face Muslim veils.
Ninety-eight per cent of Daily Express readers agreed that a restriction would help to safeguard racial harmony and improve communication.
Our exclusive poll came as ministers stepped up the pressure on Muslim leaders to demonstrate "real leadership" in the fight against extremism.
Thousands of readers registered their alarm amid mounting concern that the veil is a barrier to good race relations.
The controversy was underlined by yesterday’s Daily Express revelation that bosses at a medical school have barred Muslim students from wearing the veil. Instead, they must show their faces when talking to patients and in meetings with colleagues.
The debate – sparked when the Commons Leader Jack Straw said he had asked women to remove their veils during meetings – continued yesterday as two Cabinet ministers joined the row.
Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly dismissed claims that the Government was "demonising" Muslims, insisting everybody had a part to play in responding to the extremist threat.
"This is not just a problem for Muslim communities. The Far-Right is still with us, still poisonous, still trying to create and exploit divisions," she said.
"Extremism is an issue for all of us. We all must play our part in responding to it."
Councils will have to set out how they intend to prevent radicalisation in their communities. After talks with police chiefs and local authorities, Ms Kelly said: "We really have to raise our game. We have to work in a new way to face up to the size of the threat."
She refused to back down on moves to withdraw support for Muslim groups that failed to take a leading role in tackling extremism but said the Government was "absolutely committed" to working with organisations with a "genuine commitment" to pluralism.
In a letter to Muhammad Abdul Bari, head of the Muslim Council of Britain, she rejected claims that ministers would not work with those who disagreed with Government policy.
But she added: "I don’t accept that those in leadership positions can be passive in tackling extremism and yet expect government support. The question the public are not unreasonably asking is why should any organisation object to taking a leadership role in tackling extremism?"
Her letter followed Dr Bari’s claim that ministers were "marginalising" Muslims with comments such as Mr Straw’s suggestion that Muslim women should remove their veils.
Dr Bari said: "What is happening… has been a barrage of demonisation of the Muslim community to such an extent that the community is now scared and feels vulnerable."
The decision to ban veils was taken by Birmingham University school of medicine. In the Daily Express poll, 98 per cent of readers said veils should be banned from all hospitals.
Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell said women who covered their faces were failing to take their full place in society.
"The veil is a symbol of women’s subjugation to men," she said. "Women who are heavily veiled, whose identity is obscured to the world apart from their husbands, cannot take their full place in society."
But one Muslim Labour MP accused colleagues of playing into the hands of racists. Khalid Mahmood, MP for Birmingham Perry Barr, warned that "hype" over a small number of people encouraged "Muslim-bashing".
"The only people this will benefit is the Far-Right BNP," he warned. "It will also encourage extremists from the Muslim community who will say, ‘We told you so’."
Labour former Home Office Minister John Denham said ministers’ comments were exacerbating matters.
"In a situation where there is too little understanding between the Muslim community and the wider community, and vice-versa, it seems to be producing a defensiveness and lack of willingness to debate on the Muslim side and in the majority a sort of generalised feeling that Muslims as a whole pose some sort of threat to our entire way of life," he said.
Tory leader David Cameron said everyone in Britain had a right to wear what they liked although Mr Straw had "raised a legitimate issue".
This wedding veil is NOTHING at all... 
compared to the Muslim veil they are talking about.
You also forget that the Amish, or any other Christian woman who wears a veil during part of the wedding ceremony takes it off after being presented to the groom.
I'm for freedom too. I'm for the freedom of a public or private entity to refuse employment to anyone who wears a mask. Only criminals do this and hideously ugly people do this, ie, the elephantman. I think exceptions could be made in the latter case.
Dennis Prager was talking about this the other day. He made a good point. The Muslims say they do this to protect a woman's dignity. If that's the case, then why don't the men do it? He said the expression of "he better not show his face around here" points to the fact that most of the time when someone can't show their face it is because they should be ashamed and/or are guilty of something.
You might want to re-read the article in question. The kind of Muslim veil they are discussing is a veil which covers the face. In Islam, there are three kind of veils.
Hijab: covers the hair, neck and possibly bosom.
Niqab: covers the hair and lower part of the face.
Burka: covers all the face except a very small area for the eyes.
In the article we are discussing it's obvious to anyone with decent reading comprehension they are NOT discussing hijab or flimsy Western wedding veils and people comparing the two are either sleep deprived (I'm posting this at approx. 11 p.m. PST) or intellectually dishonest.
When I first read that, I read it as "Global Warming". I was thinking, "How are people tying veils to global warming?" although I imagine it could get pretty hot under one.
"The veil - whether a gentle covering of the hair with an agreeably patterned silk scarf or the full burka - matters only in that it is a symbol of female subjugation. The varying extremes to which Muslim women will ('voluntarily') go in order to comply with their religious strictures does not matter one jot; what matters is the central tenet, that women need to dress this way because otherwise they will be culpable for the lascivious attentions of men. That they are thus guilty of contributory negligence. And that, further, women have a clearly defined and specific role in life, which is to support their menfolk and to do as they are bidden."
Which I think is a rather nice summary of exactly what is wrong with the veil!
He also goes on to note that "if a white Christian girl petitioned a headmaster or local education department to allow her to cover herself up from top to toe because she feared the predatory attentions of her male co-students, she would be sent to the school psychiatrist.", another truth, which I include here because it amused me.
Muslims want women to be ashamed of being women. There's a hadith where Mohammed said that most of the inhabitants of hell are women.
I wonder how many crimes of convenience occur during Carnival. Imagine going to the police to report that you were raped or whatever and the only physicaly description you could provide was "He was wearing a bright gold mask."
I posted a picture of a burqa and a niqab because both of them are examples of Muslim veils which cover the face, which is the kind of veiling the article and the British public are concerned about.
The article said: "The veil is a symbol of women’s subjugation to men," she said. "Women who are heavily veiled, whose identity is obscured to the world apart from their husbands, cannot take their full place in society."
Sounds like a pretty good description of either a niqab or a burka to me.
Didn't they try and use it for that very tall woman in Florida, shortly after 9/11?
;o) 
Wasn't there a story some time ago about an Egyptian or Jordanian man who tried to sneak off to visit his lover and got caught on the bus or the train in a burka b/c one of the women was suspicious of his big feet?
And then there's the story about Michael Jackson supposedly dressing in hijab when he was visiting in Dubai about a year ago as well.
Perhaps we should ban jackets. They could be used to conceal guns.
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.