Should Dublin ban Burqas and Hijabs?

Omackeral

bubblypop wrote: »

I don't know what you're trying to suggest... You do know gay people are born that way right?

Yep. You know that being Muslim is a choice? Must be fairly sh*tty to be Muslim and gay. They'd be killed if they went to the wrong country simply for being themselves.

Sheeps

What other non muslim items of clothing would the OP like to ban also?

dennispenn

Wibbs wrote: »

I'd not be nearly so sure D. Just like Catholics ridin before marriage wearing johnnies and on the pill and plenty of Gay catholics with it, I've known Muslims who drink like fish, do a fair bit o ridin themselves outside the marital bed* and come Friday are done up all religious like, prostrating in the mosque. Gay men and women attending prayers like "Good Muslims"? Wouldn't shock me in the least. It would shock me more if there weren't. Cognitive dissonance, hypocrisy, or just simply fitting in because it's a genuine human comfort has no particular creed, seed or generation.





*one thing I've yet to see is eating pork. That of all things seems really beyond the Pale. The Jewish folks I've known are generally less kosher on that score. Pork is rebel territory mind you, but the other stuff...

The people you know that drink like fish probably aren't Muslims,but would probably come out as gay to their families before saying that they are not Muslims because of the apostate threat that hangs over them.

What sect of Muslims are these friends?

Omackeral

Omackeral wrote: »

Yep. You know that being Muslim is a choice? Must be fairly sh*tty to be Muslim and gay. They'd be killed if they went to the wrong country simply for being themselves.

What's your point?
Do you think Muslim gay people should deny who they are?

Omackeral

bubblypop wrote: »

What's your point?
Do you think Muslim gay people should deny who they are?

Definitely yes... if they happen to find themselves in an Islamic country such as Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia or Qatar, where they'd legally be allowed to be executed for simply being who they are.

Omackeral

Omackeral wrote: »

Definitely yes... if they happen to find themselves in an Islamic country such as Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia or Qatar, where they'd legally be allowed to be executed for simply being who they are.

So, that's a problem with those countries. & I agree. I could maybe end up in prison etc if I was living in one of those countries & did something against their laws. Which I don't necessarily agree with, BTW.
But it still stands that there are gay Muslim, of course. Why wouldn't there be?

dennispenn

bubblypop wrote: »

What's your point?
Do you think Muslim gay people should deny who they are?

You are probably asking the wrong person.

The Islamic cultural center is the place to ask this, the one in clonskeagh.

Irish people are torrent people,in general.

Most Islamic countries will not tolerate homosexuality or apostasy. Punishment is more than a fine,if you escape with your life you will have done well.


There was a poll done in the UK a couple of year's ago,cant recall who did the poll, channel 4 I think. It asked Muslims about gay people, and the majority of them wanted them thrown in jail.

Think about this for a moment. They didn't just see homosexuality as a sin they actually wanted them in jail.

Wibbs

dennispenn wrote: »

The people you know that drink like fish probably aren't Muslims,but would probably come out as gay to their families before saying that they are not Muslims because of the apostate threat that hangs over them.

What sect of Muslims are these friends?

Well they've not been friends as such. General acquaintances to more close acquaintances(I personally think of friends as more than that over time). They were all Sunni, save for one Shia Iranian. Libyans, Afghanis, Pakistani(though more Afghani. The cultural border can fluid, depending on area), one Jordanian and an Egyptian if memory serves. All but one was/is male. They varied, as people will, on how adherent they were. There were cultural differences. I found the Afghan dudes the most easy going funny enough and against expectation. Bloody genuine too. Extremely family and brotherhood orientated. Then again with all I got the overall general impression that me being a bloke was a big factor.

dennispenn

dennispenn wrote: »

You are probably asking the wrong person.

The Islamic cultural center is the place to ask this, the one in clonskeagh.

Irish people are torrent people,in general.

Most Islamic countries will not tolerate homosexuality or apostasy. Punishment is more than a fine,if you escape with your life you will have done well.


There was a poll done in the UK a couple of year's ago,cant recall who did the poll, channel 4 I think. It asked Muslims about gay people, and the majority of them wanted them thrown in jail.

Think about this for a moment. They didn't just see homosexuality as a sin they actually wanted them in jail.

I assume then you are OK with Muslim people coming here seeking asylum if they are gay?

Wibbs

dennispenn wrote: »

There was a poll done in the UK a couple of year's ago,cant recall who did the poll, channel 4 I think. It asked Muslims about gay people, and the majority of them wanted them thrown in jail.

Think about this for a moment. They didn't just see homosexuality as a sin they actually wanted them in jail.

That was the survey I linked earlier. They didn't say that. They did say they thought being gay shouldn't be legal and that gay people shouldn't be teachers of kids.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

That was the survey I linked earlier. They didn't say that. They did say they thought being gay shouldn't be legal and that gay people shouldn't be teachers of kids.

And tbf, I only had a quick look at that poll, but it was of 1000 Muslim's.
No indication of how they picked the people for the poll, or where they picked them from? ( I could be wrong, I just had a quick look)
There are 2.8 or something million Muslim's living in the UK, 1000 is hardly indicative of the whole population.
& yes I know how polls work.

Omackeral

bubblypop wrote: »

So, that's a problem with those countries. & I agree. I could maybe end up in prison etc if I was living in one of those countries & did something against their laws. Which I don't necessarily agree with, BTW.
But it still stands that there are gay Muslim, of course. Why wouldn't there be?

What are they doing that's against the law, though? Just being something isn't doing something. Sad state of affairs. I just wish religion, all religion, would fcuk off to be honest. It's poison.

Omackeral

Omackeral wrote: »

What are they doing that's against the law, though? Just being something isn't doing something. Sad state of affairs. I just wish religion, all religion, would fcuk off to be honest. It's poison.

I agree, they are not doing anything wrong but we can't control other countries laws.
I agree with your thoughts on religion, personally I'm atheist, but I do recognise & understand other peoples right to their faith.

dennispenn

bubblypop wrote: »

And tbf, I only had a quick look at that poll, but it was of 1000 Muslim's.
No indication of how they picked the people for the poll, or where they picked them from? ( I could be wrong, I just had a quick look)
There are 2.8 or something million Muslim's living in the UK, 1000 is hardly indicative of the whole population.
& yes I know how polls work.

It was channel 4 who did the survey. You will not get a more liberal media outlet than channel 4.

dennispenn

bubblypop wrote: »

I assume then you are OK with Muslim people coming here seeking asylum if they are gay?

I think we can cut straight to the chase here and say that i have a huge problem when 73% ? Of asylum applications have been rejected but the appeals system allows them to stay for what seems like for years and often is as they bed in roots here in this glorious social welfare haven country.

Do I have a problem with gay people? 100% no. Absolutely not. But I do have a problem with bogus asylum seekers.

dennispenn

dennispenn wrote: »

I think we can cut straight to the chase here and say that i have a huge problem when 73% ? Of asylum applications have been rejected but the appeals system allows them to stay for what seems like for years and often is as they bed in roots here in this glorious social welfare haven country.

Do I have a problem with gay people? 100% no. Absolutely not. But I do have a problem with bogus asylum seekers.

I agree, the asylum system here is terrible. Anyone coming seeking asylum should be dealt with in a matter of months, at most. Germany can do it in weeks.
Although what this has to do with Muslim women wearing a Burka?

dennispenn

Omackeral wrote: »

What are they doing that's against the law, though? Just being something isn't doing something. Sad state of affairs. I just wish religion, all religion, would fcuk off to be honest. It's poison.

Ah now, tis a long time if ever a Catholic chopped off someone's head or threw them off a building for being what he or she is.

dennispenn

bubblypop wrote: »

I agree, the asylum system here is terrible. Anyone coming seeking asylum should be dealt with in a matter of months, at most. Germany can do it in weeks.
Although what this has to do with Muslim women wearing a Burka?

Nothing at all. But was just answering your question.

Burkas have no place in a civilised western country. ðŸ‘

dennispenn

dennispenn wrote: »

Nothing at all. But was just answering your question.

Burkas have no place in a civilised western country. ðŸ‘

I don't believe a civilized country anywhere has the right to force people to either wear or not wear any particular clothing.

dennispenn

bubblypop wrote: »

I don't believe a civilized country anywhere has the right to force people to either wear or not wear any particular clothing.

Not even for security reasons?

Even some Islamic countries won't allow burkas because of security risks.

dennispenn

dennispenn wrote: »

Not even for security reasons?

Even some Islamic countries won't allow burkas because of security risks.

I believe banks, airports etc have security issues with Burkas & niqabs, & yes if required the ladies should remove them, most do I think.
But I don't believe in bans on clothing, If I want to wear a balaclava, or a scarf up over my face, or a hoody up with a baseball cap on then I think that is my right.
Individual companies can make rules for their own buildings, if I don't like them, then I don't go there, but making it illegal? A step too far.
I don't think the government should ban me from wearing them!

dennispenn

bubblypop wrote: »

I believe banks, airports etc have security issues with Burkas & niqabs, & yes if required the ladies should remove them, most do I think.
But I don't believe in bans on clothing, If I want to wear a balaclava, or a scarf up over my face, or a hoody up with a baseball cap on then I think that is my right.
Individual companies can make rules for their own buildings, if I don't like them, then I don't go there, but making it illegal? A step too far.
I don't think the government should ban me from wearing them!

Yeah I strongly disagree. Having someone with a face veil sitting on a train carriage,sitting in a mall With a rug sack,heading into a musical arena,in a courtroom,airport. ... walking around in public. ... its all the same to me. There is no need,and as I said earlier,is NOT required by any religious law.

Sweetemotion

bubblypop wrote: »

I believe banks, airports etc have security issues with Burkas & niqabs, & yes if required the ladies should remove them, most do I think.
But I don't believe in bans on clothing, If I want to wear a balaclava, or a scarf up over my face, or a hoody up with a baseball cap on then I think that is my right.
Individual companies can make rules for their own buildings, if I don't like them, then I don't go there, but making it illegal? A step too far.
I don't think the government should ban me from wearing them!

I don't get this balaclava, hoody or scraf reference but it's always used in these debates, none of these are associated with religious views and women aren't socially expected to wear them.

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

I don't believe a civilized country anywhere has the right to force people to either wear or not wear any particular clothing.

Except, of course, that all countries do so. Hence the nudity or decency laws. Just as most "civilized" countries have laws against the incitement of hatred, which would prevent you from wearing a Brownshirt uniform in an "inappropriate" setting.

Freedom of expression does not come without certain constraints.

dennispenn

dennispenn wrote: »

Ah now, tis a long time if ever a Catholic chopped off someone's head or threw them off a building for being what he or she is.

True they haven't, although Catholics have been involved in many "dubious" or outright wrong activities due to the nature of their faith. While they're not (currently) on the same level as Islam, their past shows the same potential for violence, and there are some very strong enclaves of extremely devout Christians spread across the world. Opus Deus has received a lot of criticism over the years for excessive/questionable behavior, and while they're not chopping heads, I wouldn't put it past them should they feel themselves justified for doing so. Remember, that religious people can get justification from either a voice nobody else hears, or due to a literal personal interpretation from 2k+ year old book written in a different language but translated/edited over the years.

The idea is that all religions should be banned equally. It combats the idea that any are gaining preferential treatment and removes the cause that divides so many people.... Religion should be a personal/private expression among other of the faithful, but not in the public domain.

Chris_Heilong

If every EU country follows this then it would be one step further towards the kind of free and fair society most people want to live in. There was a time when China and Japan used to tie women feet to prevent them from growing as it was their culture that women with small feet were more elegant and a sign of high class, lucky for all women in these countries some people in power decided this was a barbaric tradition and it was fazed out, Sometimes culture and tradition is just wrong.

Malayalam

If it is so regressive to ban full face covering in public, then how come...

Belgium banned them as of 2015. Ban upheld by European Court of Human Rights 2017.
Austria banned them in 2017.
Bulgaria banned them in 2016.
Denmark banned them in 2018.
France banned them from shools in 2004, and from all public places in 2010. Ban upheld by European Court in 2014.
Germany banned them for soldiers and all state workers in 2017. Wider ban under discussion. ”Show your face. The full covering is not permissible and should be banned." ~ Angela Merkel.
Latvia banned them in 2016.
The Netherlands bannd them in 2012.
Norway banned them in schools and universities in 2018.
Switzerland banned them in 2016.
Partial bans in Italy since 2010.
Partial Bans in Catalonia, Spain.
Banned in Chad, Cameroon, Congo-Brazzaville, Gabon, parts of Niger (as a reaction to Boko Haram and radical Islam)
Egypt bans full veil in places of education and is considering ban in all public places. It this Muslim country the full veil is believed to be contrary to secularism, associated with Salafist extremism and not an integral part of Islam.
Morocco banned the burqa in 2017.
Syria banned full face veils in universities in 2010.
Quebec, Canada bans full face coverings under Bill 62, 2017
China bans the burqa in some areas.

Several other countries/areas are considering banning full face veils, unless used for specific purposes such as weather protection on a motorbike etc.

The countries listed from Europe are hardly bastions of fascism. They also have a lot more experience than Ireland regarding issues presented regarding full veils in public. The Muslim countries listed have seen the link in their societies between outer symbols and extremist ideology, and recognise that full face veils are not inherently Islamic at all.
I don't see the problem with following their lead.

pauldla

dennispenn wrote: »

Ah now, tis a long time if ever a Catholic chopped off someone's head or threw them off a building for being what he or she is.

Since at least 1994, anyhow...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanase_Seromba

...though admittedly they weren't thrown off buildings, the building was thrown on them.

CruelCoin

bubblypop wrote: »

I don't believe a civilized country anywhere has the right to force people to either wear or not wear any particular clothing.

For the sake of social cohesion, it's best if people can interact with each other, no?

Nothing wrong with the Hijab, al-amira, shayla, khimar, chador etc as they don't cover the face. Nothing wrong with those. Most Irish grannies dress that way anyway.
But the Niqab and the burka can do with a ban. Socially restrictive and repressive.

Danzy

The Working Class are rising up in Chemnitz, no longer willing to be stabbed, raped and robbed so that their self perceived betters in the modern Left and establishment can indulge mad flights of fancy.

By pretending that these people are far right or even right wing, it is just another, in a long line, attempt to stifle debate, stifle opposition.

Malayalam

Danzy wrote: »

The Working Class are rising up in Chemnitz, no longer willing to be stabbed, raped and robbed so that their self perceived betters in the modern Left and establishment can indulge mad flights of fancy.

By pretending that these people are far right or even right wing, it is just another, in a long line, attempt to stifle debate, stifle opposition.

Very difficult to exactly understand what is happening in Chemnitz. Frightening actually to watch videos of it, not just because of the visceral anger of the protestors but also because of the uber-militarised police personnel and vehicles.
Also almost every media outlet describes it without question as ''far right'' protests - looking at the crowds it does seem there are some who might loosely fall into what one imagines the far right looks like (this ground is so tricky!), but after the camera moves from the obviously click-baity burly lads, there also looks like many older people, many regular townies.
Of the almost 10,000 who marched to demonstrate after Daniel Hillig's stabbing recently, there cannot surely be a majority of that crowd that is far right? Or even a significant number? So, why not say the townspeople also marched? And then the government might have to enter into discussions with these people to hear their side of the story. Because even if we might like to look on appalled at what we are told are German ''right wingers'' or whatever, something is rotten there...and needs to be addressed.

It's horrible actually. Lived in Germany for several years, and the protests were always groovy and peaceful in that time.

This tube is in German, but essentially these are for the most part ordinary folk. Ordinary but very angry people. Angry people with unpopular, uncomfortable views. They insist they are not radical right. Or ''Nazis''. Why are they repeatedly being deemed such by media?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiUQMWMjDog

Grayson

Danzy wrote: »

The Working Class are rising up in Chemnitz, no longer willing to be stabbed, raped and robbed so that their self perceived betters in the modern Left and establishment can indulge mad flights of fancy.

By pretending that these people are far right or even right wing, it is just another, in a long line, attempt to stifle debate, stifle opposition.

The guys who were "protesting" gave hitler salutes and chased down foreigners. I don't think anyone is pretending they're far right. Trying to say they're not is pretending.

Also, east germans have form when it comes to this.
https://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/01/world/a-wave-of-attacks-on-foreigners-stirs-shock-in-germany.html

The guy who was killed was cuban german and hated racists like the ones who are protesting his death. He was subjected to racist abuse in the past and knew those thugs for what they were. The crazy thing is that if he was still alive and had been need the protests he would have been one of the people that they chased down and assaulted.

I think that maybe rather than foreigners not integrating into germany it's the Saxons who aren't. Since reunification it's been the place with the most neo-nazi's, with the most violence against foreigners and also with the most subsidies.

It's worth remembering that east Germany is the place with the greatest concentration of far right supporters. Before the financial crises and current migration crises the far right were polling at about 10% there. It's where the NSU originated. And the NSU weren't part of an underground. There were openly neo nazi clubs and gatherings there.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/15/neo-nazi-murders-revealing-germanys-darkest-secrets
There were also the Rostock riots where neo-nazi's, cheered on by the locals firebombed an apartment building. The occupants survived by fleeing to the roof and passing their children along the stairs in a human chain.

Shenshen

And at the same time, just shy of 20.000 people demonstrated in Berlin and Hamburg to make the cities "safe havens" for refugees coming across the mediterranean.

Only they did so peacefully, so the media don't care. To make the news, you have to apparently behave like the guys in Chemnitz, chase people through the streets, threaten and beat up bystanders, get into fights with the police and if you can cause some significant damages to private property.

Malayalam

Shenshen wrote: »

And at the same time, just shy of 20.000 people demonstrated in Berlin and Hamburg to make the cities "safe havens" for refugees coming across the mediterranean.

Only they did so peacefully, so the media don't care. To make the news, you have to apparently behave like the guys in Chemnitz, chase people through the streets, threaten and beat up bystanders, get into fights with the police and if you can cause some significant damages to private property.

I think as you do that the far right are odious. And I think they are also a small part of what's happening in Chemnitz, they are there, doubtless, but are not the whole story. Chemnitz has 250,000 population, Berlin has 3.5 million, Hamburg has more than 1.5 million, so the numbers are not telling the whole story. They tell some of the story, but there is another story going on in placeslike Chemnitz that cannot be completely ignored. Or it could be ignored but it will lead to bad things happening. And I am in touch with these stories as one of my children lives full time in the part of Germany that was formerly east Germany and is heavily involved with refugee welcome and settlement programs.

Shenshen

Malayalam wrote: »

Very difficult to exactly understand what is happening in Chemnitz. Frightening actually to watch videos of it, not just because of the visceral anger of the protestors but also because of the uber-militarised police personnel and vehicles.
Also almost every media outlet describes it without question as ''far right'' protests - looking at the crowds it does seem there are some who might loosely fall into what one imagines the far right looks like (this ground is so tricky!), but after the camera moves from the obviously click-baity burly lads, there also looks like many older people, many regular townies.
Of the almost 10,000 who marched to demonstrate after Daniel Hillig's stabbing recently, there cannot surely be a majority of that crowd that is far right? Or even a significant number? So, why not say the townspeople also marched? And then the government might have to enter into discussions with these people to hear their side of the story. Because even if we might like to look on appalled at what we are told are German ''right wingers'' or whatever, something is rotten there...and needs to be addressed.

It's horrible actually. Lived in Germany for several years, and the protests were always groovy and peaceful in that time.

This tube is in German, but essentially these are for the most part ordinary folk. Ordinary but very angry people. Angry people with unpopular, uncomfortable views. They insist they are not radical right. Or ''Nazis''. Why are they repeatedly being deemed such by media?

I grew up in Germany. If you want to find the died-in-the-wool right wing extremists, you need to look at people over 60. A sizeable chunk of them would put the Ku Klux Klan to shame.

And I'm old enough to remember the early 1990s, when "regular townsfolk" stood around and were clapping as right-wingers burned down an apartment block housing Vietnamese people - with people still inside. When firefighters arrived, those upstanding folks tried all they could to block their way.

Malayalam

Shenshen wrote: »

I grew up in Germany. If you want to find the died-in-the-wool right wing extremists, you need to look at people over 60. A sizeable chunk of them would put the Ku Klux Klan to shame.

And I'm old enough to remember the early 1990s, when "regular townsfolk" stood around and were clapping as right-wingers burned down an apartment block housing Vietnamese people - with people still inside. When firefighters arrived, those upstanding folks tried all they could to block their way.

Perhaps. There are bad people everywhere. Really bad. I worked always with Turkish gastarbeiters for the years I was there, as a cleaner etc., and I saw some really bad stuff as to how they were treated, I can tell you. I just think it might be worth it for the authorities to actually sit down with the people who are protesting and hear what their story is. To avoid the sh!t really hitting the fan.

Giraffe Box

Danzy wrote: »

The Working Class are rising up in Chemnitz, no longer willing to be stabbed, raped and robbed so that their self perceived betters in the modern Left and establishment can indulge mad flights of fancy.

By pretending that these people are far right or even right wing, it is just another, in a long line, attempt to stifle debate, stifle opposition.

Nah it was right-wing alright, the anniversary of the invasion of Poland and all that. Don't be silly.

troyzer

Muslim countries may force women to wear head coverings. We don't. And that's why we're better.

Danzy

Giraffe Box wrote: »

Nah it was right-wing alright, the anniversary of the invasion of Poland and all that. Don't be silly.

No doubt there were some Nazis there but the very majority were ordinary German working class people who have just had enough.

Forgot about that, isn't it ironic that on that day, that some German Nazis and Communist Antifa types were once again massing on the Polish border.

History rhyming in a small way.

People can only take so much and they came together in Chemnitz to stand up for themselves. No doubt the Nazis and the Antifa twats should all have been rounded up, brothers having a spat.

Shenshen

Malayalam wrote: »

Perhaps. There are bad people everywhere. Really bad. I worked always with Turkish gastarbeiters for the years I was there, as a cleaner etc., and I saw some really bad stuff as to how they were treated, I can tell you. I just think it might be worth it for the authorities to actually sit down with the people who are protesting and hear what their story is. To avoid the sh!t really hitting the fan.

I'm honestly not enitrely sure if anything useful will come from talking to a group of people who feel that a town where refugees make for just 2.5% of the population needs to be re-germanised. In the country of Saxony, the total pecentage of non-nationals is just 4.4%, yet it's the country with the highest number of right-wing/racially motivated crimes.

I'm all for talking, but given the facts I do wonder what could be achieved.

Shenshen

Danzy wrote: »

No doubt there were some Nazis there but the very majority were ordinary German working class people who have just had enough.

Forgot about that, isn't it ironic that on that day, that some German Nazis and Communist Antifa types were once again massing on the Polish border.

History rhyming in a small way.

People can only take so much and they came together in Chemnitz to stand up for themselves. No doubt the Nazis and the Antifa twats should all have been rounded up, brothers having a spat.

If you can't "take it" that out of every 100 people you'd meet in the street, 2 have not been born in the same place as you and you feel that it's therefore ok to hound the few you do find through the streets in fear of their lives, I'm not really sure what to say to you.

Shenshen

troyzer wrote: »

Muslim countries may force women to hear head coverings. We don't. And that's why we're better.

This. We don't force people to either cover or uncover their heads, we leave the choice to them. That's why I choose to live here.

Grayson

Malayalam wrote: »

Very difficult to exactly understand what is happening in Chemnitz. Frightening actually to watch videos of it, not just because of the visceral anger of the protestors but also because of the uber-militarised police personnel and vehicles.
Also almost every media outlet describes it without question as ''far right'' protests - looking at the crowds it does seem there are some who might loosely fall into what one imagines the far right looks like (this ground is so tricky!), but after the camera moves from the obviously click-baity burly lads, there also looks like many older people, many regular townies.
Of the almost 10,000 who marched to demonstrate after Daniel Hillig's stabbing recently, there cannot surely be a majority of that crowd that is far right? Or even a significant number? So, why not say the townspeople also marched? And then the government might have to enter into discussions with these people to hear their side of the story. Because even if we might like to look on appalled at what we are told are German ''right wingers'' or whatever, something is rotten there...and needs to be addressed.

It's horrible actually. Lived in Germany for several years, and the protests were always groovy and peaceful in that time.

This tube is in German, but essentially these are for the most part ordinary folk. Ordinary but very angry people. Angry people with unpopular, uncomfortable views. They insist they are not radical right. Or ''Nazis''. Why are they repeatedly being deemed such by media?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiUQMWMjDog

That's an unsafe assumption. Remember that the far right actually poll very high there. Into the double digits. If it was broad selection of people then you can assume that probably about 20% were. However because it's a demonstration against migrants you can say that people who are not anti-migrant weren't there. So the proportion would be even higher.

Also, I don't know about you but I wouldn't be in a march with a load of people throwing out nazi salutes. I would have turned around and gone home as soon as i saw them there. Anyone who marches with neo-nazi's is a sympathiser at best.

Danzy

Malayalam wrote: »

Very difficult to exactly understand what is happening in Chemnitz. Frightening actually to watch videos of it, not just because of the visceral anger of the protestors but also because of the uber-militarised police personnel and vehicles.
Also almost every media outlet describes it without question as ''far right'' protests - looking at the crowds it does seem there are some who might loosely fall into what one imagines the far right looks like (this ground is so tricky!), but after the camera moves from the obviously click-baity burly lads, there also looks like many older people, many regular townies.
Of the almost 10,000 who marched to demonstrate after Daniel Hillig's stabbing recently, there cannot surely be a majority of that crowd that is far right? Or even a significant number? So, why not say the townspeople also marched? And then the government might have to enter into discussions with these people to hear their side of the story. Because even if we might like to look on appalled at what we are told are German ''right wingers'' or whatever, something is rotten there...and needs to be addressed.

It's horrible actually. Lived in Germany for several years, and the protests were always groovy and peaceful in that time.

This tube is in German, but essentially these are for the most part ordinary folk. Ordinary but very angry people. Angry people with unpopular, uncomfortable views. They insist they are not radical right. Or ''Nazis''. Why are they repeatedly being deemed such by media?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiUQMWMjDog

They are going against the opinions that the establishment think they should have, the modern left activists are largely the children of the establishment so they also are against these heretics and sinners.

The worst thing one can be called in Germany is a Nazi, so they use that.

Ironically the protesters in East Germany who called out the GDR in the 80s were also labelled Nazis for daring to go against the consensus of their then ruling class.

It is a go too phrase of the modern era to call people, far right, Nazis, Fascists etc and often over the most innocuous views.

Silencing people, berating them from the alter, forcing conformity of thought, did not work for the Church the last fifty years, the modern Left are foolish to resurrect that dead end approach.

Malayalam

Grayson wrote: »

That's an unsafe assumption. Remember that the far right actually poll very high there. Into the double digits. If it was broad selection of people then you can assume that probably about 20% were. However because it's a demonstration against migrants you can say that people who are not anti-migrant weren't there. So the proportion would be even higher.

Also, I don't know about you but I wouldn't be in a march with a load of people throwing out nazi salutes. I would have turned around and gone home as soon as i saw them there. Anyone who marches with neo-nazi's is a sympathiser at best.

I take your points, I didn't know they poll so high there. Regardless, ignoring the people massed in those videos (I watched quite a few just to try guage their demographic), however horrible a large percent of them might be, is not going to be a good idea long term. Imagine if that many people were marching somewhere with a comparable population here, like in Cork. I think we would think/know we had some kind of a serious problem going on. Whatever has happened there, it's fairly serious, it looks like to me anyways.

Cabaal

For the people looking to ban Hijabs, so you also want to ban old women going to mass that cover their heads? it's basically the same thing

Malayalam

Cabaal wrote: »

For the people looking to ban Hijabs, so you also want to ban old women going to mass that cover their heads? it's basically the same thing

People commenting here have constantly differentiated between Hijab and full face veil. They are not of the same order at all.

Malayalam

Malayalam wrote: »

I take your points, I didn't know they poll so high there. Regardless, ignoring the people massed in those videos (I watched quite a few just to try guage their demographic), however horrible a large percent of them might be, is not going to be a good idea long term. Imagine if that many people were marching somewhere with a comparable population here, like in Cork. I think we would think/know we had some kind of a serious problem going on. Whatever has happened there, it's fairly serious, it looks like to me anyways.

It's guilt by association. You see it with any political march. If there are extremists in any crowd, then the whole march is tarnished as being sympathetic to the extremists. You only really see it happening with the far right though.

The problem though is that these kind of marches do nothing to help the anti-immigration crowd. I'm not talking about the hardliner anti-immigration, but the average person who has concerns about immigration. The far right are far worse an influence, and everyone with a iota of common sense steers clear of them. It is a genuine pity that such a march behaved in this manner, and allowed the far right to take such a prominent position.

As for being serious... it is... and we're going to see more of these marches in Germany or mainland Europe. Hopefully, they can push out the far-right though, and keep the purpose of the marches clean.

dennispenn

Cabaal wrote: »

For the people looking to ban Hijabs, so you also want to ban old women going to mass that cover their heads? it's basically the same thing

You are under the impression,and you are not alone,that the hijab is a religious garment, it's not.

The elderly woman wearing a headscarf going to mass does so as a fashion accessory.

Danzy

Many of those protesting, the 1000 AntiFa crowd had hammer and sickle flags, the symbol of Nazism's older and more murderous brother and one time military ally.

You'd have been in bed that day, no matter what your opinion was ;0.

The majority of the people there were peaceful working class Germans who have had enough.

You will always have Antifa/NeoNazi types but they were in the minority and not representative of wider views and especially of a Working Class town like Chemnitz.

Spolit kids looking for the thrill of a street fight.