Discrimination against non Muslims?

bonkey

bonkey wrote: »

How do you know what was on her passport photo?

This question was also asked by another poster. The only response to it has been to ask whether or not we think its right that the woman in question didn't have to lift her veil.

Now...here's the thing. If her passport photo shows a cloaked face, asking the woman in question to lift her veil at passport control is a waste of time.

Suggesting that its wrong she not be asked implies that the photo in her passport is not of her wearing a Burqa.

Either which way, I'd still like to know how the OP knows what was in her passport.

OK-Cancel-Apply

I don't believe the story about the passport photo with the covered face. That's just ludicrous. Also, I think "PC gone mad" crowd should be viewed with suspicion. There seems to be a trend these days in the blogging community of people who claim to be speaking as the everyman, saying what everyone 'thinks privately but won't say' - these people are far-right snakes seeking to set the cat amongst the pidgeons by channelling their xenophobia into the demagoguery of "aren't we sick of all these Muslims making demands?". I've seen some who even claim that people who support multiculturalism are racists! Pure BS.

We Irish should see right through that, and remember back to when WE weren't so popular abroad.

PaintingMedium

bonkey wrote: »

This question was also asked by another poster. The only response to it has been to ask whether or not we think its right that the woman in question didn't have to lift her veil.

Now...here's the thing. If her passport photo shows a cloaked face, asking the woman in question to lift her veil at passport control is a waste of time.

Suggesting that its wrong she not be asked implies that the photo in her passport is not of her wearing a Burqa.

Either which way, I'd still like to know how the OP knows what was in her passport.

I agree with this post, how the hell did he know what was on a womans passport?

I think this story is total bull and lies. It is something that would be printed in tabloid rags and then suddenly retracted a few days later when it shows the only source was some far right nutter!

If it was true, can the original poster tell us

What date and time did this happen?
What flight and where was it from?
Irish people go through the EU gates, whilst non europeans go through a different check point, so how did his friend manage to be behind this woman?
If it is all true, how did they see the picture?

COMPLETE LIES

rowlandbrowner

PaintingMedium wrote: »

I agree with this post, how the hell did he know what was on a womans passport?

I think this story is total bull and lies. It is something that would be printed in tabloid rags and then suddenly retracted a few days later when it shows the only source was some far right nutter!

If it was true, can the original poster tell us

What date and time did this happen?
What flight and where was it from?
Irish people go through the EU gates, whilst non europeans go through a different check point, so how did his friend manage to be behind this woman?
If it is all true, how did they see the picture?

COMPLETE LIES

Agreed

It’s a story worthy of Littlejohn.

the GALL

rowlandbrowner wrote: »

Agreed

It’s a story worthy of Littlejohn.

Agreed, like most of the op's posts/threads.

merrionsq

the GALL wrote: »

Your missing the point, your beliefs are your beliefs.
The muslim beliefs are taken from the koran, the koran is the book of God. The muslim lives their life according to the bookof God.
What your saying doesn't make sence because you don't believe/like in the muslim religon/custom it's wrong. How is it wrong?

I think you may be missing the point.
Just because someone has a belief (non-specific). Does that mean everyone else has to accept it?
To take an extreme example, aren't we lucky that someone questioned the beliefs of the Nazi's, rather than saying: "Hey, like whatever you're into, man".

Now, if a country has a set of procedures and laws for airport security, shouldn't they be applied equally and fairly. Rather than on an ad-hoc basis depending on what each indiviual claims to believe in? A relgious/cultural belief may be strongly held, but if there exceptions have to be made for all of them, there is no point having these procedures.

CPT. SURF

After September 11th here in the USA there were many reports in the papers and on TV showing drivers liscence/passport photos with women wearing the burqa so that one could only see their eyes. You could never identify the individual in person just by looking at the photo.

They have subsequently established new rules and regulations. Now I would assume, and this is just my opinion, that these documents were originally given the all clear because the person taking the photo was either too lazy to ask the woman to identify herself visually or did not do so for fear of offending her. Regardless it is pretty ridiculous situation when a document that is supposed to identify you does nothing of the sort.

You think that women should be told how to dress?

No that is Muslims dude

CPT. SURF

Airport authorities are simply trying to make a balance between security fears and not offending somebody’s culture.

This line of thinking is so dangerous.

bonkey

merrionsq wrote: »

I think you may be missing the point.
Just because someone has a belief (non-specific). Does that mean everyone else has to accept it?
To take an extreme example, aren't we lucky that someone questioned the beliefs of the Nazi's, rather than saying: "Hey, like whatever you're into, man".

Actually, thats pretty-much what people did say about the Nazis. Even Gandhi had nice things to say about that Hitler chappie (which I believe Sand used to have as a sig at some point).

It was the actions carried out which were the source of the problem.

Now, if a country has a set of procedures and laws for airport security, shouldn't they be applied equally and fairly.

It still hasn't been established that the procedures are not allied equally and fairly. We have an unsubstantiated story (which I've heard more than once before, strangely) about an alleged passport photo which showed effectively nothing of the person it should show....coupled with some illogical complaint to the effect that the person in question should have been examined without their burka despite there being no picture of them without same to compare it to.

Rather than on an ad-hoc basis depending on what each indiviual claims to believe in?

I think we should establish whether or not this is the case before we start getting outraged because of a suspiciously-self-inconsistent story alleging that it is so.

Do international regulations allow for passport photos which do not show the face? We need to establish this before we go further, because if not then the original story is a fabrication.

Do internation border controls prevent burqha-wearing women from being identified at all, or do they allow for them to be taken aside, and examined by a female member of staff in a manner not inconsistent with the religious beliefs of the person in question? If the latter, then there is no basis for complaint.

A relgious/cultural belief may be strongly held, but if there exceptions have to be made for all of them, there is no point having these procedures.

Exactly. If these exceptions have to be made, then there's a big problem. The thing is that the only evidence we have so far suggesting that these exceptions have to be made is a story which doesn't add up which - as I've said - I've heard more than once.

Isn't it interesting, though, that the thread started with the (farcical) notion that this was discrimination against motorcycle-helmet wearers....but has now turned into what it was presumably always meant as....an attempt to highlight issues between Muslims and so-called 'western' culture, without establishing that the alleged issues actually exist.

Now we're moving beyond establishing whether or not the issue is real, and getting into that whole 'why should we accept their behaviour' arena.

I tell you...if the OP wanted to bring about such a discussion, I doubt they could have done it more effectively.

bonkey

CPT. SURF wrote: »

After September 11th here in the USA there were many reports in the papers and on TV showing drivers liscence/passport photos with women wearing the burqa so that one could only see their eyes. You could never identify the individual in person just by looking at the photo.

Really? Can you find any examples in online media? I looked, and a quick search produced only this article from 2003, which would seem to suggest that if such things were around, they're illegal to begin with.

Similarly, if you check the passport regulations for pretty-much any nation, you should also find that the largest allowance is to allow a burqa cover the top of the head and the neck, but must leave the face exposed.

The more i've looked for info corroborating what the OP is alleging, the more it seems that the issue is that the passports do contain pictures without the face-covering, but that officials don't bother checking against them.

the GALL

merrionsq wrote: »

I think you may be missing the point.
Just because someone has a belief (non-specific). Does that mean everyone else has to accept it?
To take an extreme example, aren't we lucky that someone questioned the beliefs of the Nazi's, rather than saying: "Hey, like whatever you're into, man".

Now, if a country has a set of procedures and laws for airport security, shouldn't they be applied equally and fairly. Rather than on an ad-hoc basis depending on what each indiviual claims to believe in? A relgious/cultural belief may be strongly held, but if there exceptions have to be made for all of them, there is no point having these procedures.

Im sorry im not missing the point, the alledged woman was wearing a burqa, as Ive stated previously it's part of the religon to cover up (read the koran) and the reasons are there. It is an offence (against god)for the muslim to deviate off this.
The woman in question was not stopped because the state did/does not have the correct procedures in place to handle this situtation, As the op stated.
So because of our and by our I mean the states inadaquices we have the right to offend other nation's?......well.

djpbarry

merrionsq wrote: »

Just because someone has a belief (non-specific). Does that mean everyone else has to accept it?
To take an extreme example, aren't we lucky that someone questioned the beliefs of the Nazi's, rather than saying: "Hey, like whatever you're into, man".

People are entitled to believe whatever they want. Or, to put it another way, people are not going to change their beliefs because they are told that what they believe is wrong or evil or whatever. For example, if a white-supremacist is forbidden to publicly air his views, he will still remain a white-supremacist.

It was the actions of the Nazi's rather than their beliefs that led people to question them. Granted, the two are inextricably linked, but not everyone will act on their beliefs in such a manner. For example I imagine there are plenty of people in Ireland who believe that individuals from certain countries should not be permitted to live here, but that doesn't mean that they are going to actively seek out said individuals and administer their own brand of justice.

CPT. SURF wrote: »

No that is Muslims dude

Did it occur to you that perhaps some women WANT to wear burqas? To take the less extreme case, there is quite a large Muslim presence where I work and a lot of girls wear the hijab - I'd be surprised if they are all being forced to do so. I imagine a large number of them want to wear it, possibly as a symbol of their cultural background. I don't really see it as being all that different to Scottish guys wearing kilts when they come to Dublin for a weekend.

I don't know why some women wear burqas, but it's not really any of my business. Besides, I don't think they look all that bad really:

CPT. SURF

AH I knew you would ask for examples of 7 year old stories and articles. In fact most of it was stuff I saw on my local news station where they presented the drivers liscenses. I aint lying to you dude, I seen it with my own eyes.

Of course there are women who want to wear the burqa/veil. You might want to look into Plato's cave and see what that is all about.

Or click here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSO93lMhoDk

CPT. SURF

Oh and before anybody jumps on my back just because they were drivers liscenses let me say this. US drivers liscenses are sufficient for travel to Canada, Mexico, most of the rest of Central America and the Carribbean, and throughout the USA. For US citizens of course.

meathstevie

Sorry folks, call me what you like but over the years I got the impression that only fundamentalists revert to wearing burqas or make their wifes and daughters wear them.

I've known many moderate Muslims over the years, women as well as men and all of them without exception will tell you that a simple head scarf combined with generally modest dress is more than sufficient to obey religious dresscodes.

In my opinion a burqa is a political statement far more than a religious one and the political ideology it stands for in my opinion is far from compatible with Western democracy. Think about something like the Dominicans at the height of the Spanish Inquisition in you won't be too far of the mindset.

Anyway, so far for that...

As for the airport issue : you can't show your snout so get out. That doesn't mean that a simple common courtesy like a bit of privacy and a female officer doing the ID check shouldn't be provided. At the end of the day making sure a female Garda is rostered in at the immigration desk at all times can't be that insurmountable a hurdle given the current gender make up of the force.

gordon_gekko

wearing the burka is a political statment which means i reject the values and customs of your country

MarkNL

djpbarry wrote: »

Did it occur to you that perhaps some women WANT to wear burqas?

maybe I would WANT to wear a motorcycle helmet with transparent blackish visor, everywhere. But I would not be allowed to do that in a bank, most public places who would require me to remove the helmet etc.

Why? Because they want to be able to recognize my face. The authorities would never allow me to have my passport photo with me wearing my motor cycle helmet. And with the visor up, my face would be MORE recognizable than these women with their burquas (most actually do this because the men in their family tell them to, and then tell them to tell the gullible westeners that it really was their own choice).

If I showed up near Mecca, I wouldn't be allowed in. Why not? Pure and utter discrimination. Imagine the outcry if the USA declared Washington off limits for muslims.

Oilrig

We live in Ireland, its a country with intrinsic values that are attractive to other people.

We need to retain these values, ie join us

If you decide here is where you want to be then adapt to our values and join in.

If not, then pick somewhere else.

the GALL

MarkNL wrote: »

maybe I would WANT to wear a motorcycle helmet with transparent blackish visor, everywhere. But I would not be allowed to do that in a bank, most public places who would require me to remove the helmet etc.

Why? Because they want to be able to recognize my face. The authorities would never allow me to have my passport photo with me wearing my motor cycle helmet. And with the visor up, my face would be MORE recognizable than these women with their burquas (most actually do this because the men in their family tell them to, and then tell them to tell the gullible westeners that it really was their own choice).

If I showed up near Mecca, I wouldn't be allowed in. Why not? Pure and utter discrimination. Imagine the outcry if the USA declared Washington off limits for muslims.

wtf planet are you on,....
Mecca, wtf do you know about Mecca.If your from the US.
If you have a problem with a bank in the state then take it up with the banks policys, theses people have there opionions, and if you think you can change them well go ahead and do that, you will not change the views/opionion/ beliefs stated here.
As for mecca ........what is it to you?.......well.

djpbarry

MarkNL wrote: »

The authorities would never allow me to have my passport photo with me wearing my motor cycle helmet. And with the visor up, my face would be MORE recognizable than these women with their burquas...

:rolleyes: No ****.

You're taking my point completely out of context. I was speaking generally and was not referring to passport checks.

MarkNL wrote: »

most actually do this because the men in their family tell them to, and then tell them to tell the gullible westeners that it really was their own choice.

Is that so? I presume you can show me the detailed survey you have carried out to back up your position?

MarkNL wrote: »

If I showed up near Mecca, I wouldn't be allowed in. Why not? Pure and utter discrimination.

I have no idea what that has to do with passport photos.

oscarBravo

Despite being asked several times, the OP has not backed up his assertion that the woman's passport photo showed her wearing a burqa.

I'm making a judgement call that the story was apocryphal, and closing this thread.