[bots]

equally, they could dress up as police officers, army etc etc etc .... criminals have been dressing up in disguise for generations, our reaction has never been to ban what they are mimicking

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

equally, they could dress up as police officers, army etc etc etc .... criminals have been dressing up in disguise for generations, our reaction has never been to ban what they are mimicking

True.

As long as face covering clothing isn't allowed in areas that could be a safety risk (which is often the case anyway), there's no reason to ban them completely.

Reactionary law changes are never a good idea.

[Tom4784]

How many terrorist attacks have been committed by people wearing a burkha as a disguise?

You could make a case for banning everything out of fear of terrorism but to do so would mean that terrorism wins.

[Tom4784]

Using a burkha in a terrorist attack in a western country doesn't make much sense anyway, people take notice of people that wear burkhas, surely the point of a disguise in terrorist attacks is to get into a place where the attack will happen without raising suspicion?

Withano's points about T-shirts and Jeans is true, nobody looks twice at someone in normal clothes.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Using a burkha in a terrorist attack in a western country doesn't make much sense anyway, people take notice of people that wear burkhas, surely the point of a disguise in terrorist attacks is to get into a place where the attack will happen without raising suspicion?

Withano's points about T-shirts and Jeans is true, nobody looks twice at someone in normal clothes.

thats very true, i remember after the tube bombings, anyone with a rucksack was watched constantly

[Withano]

You must have an annual breakdown on the 31st of October

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Withano

You must have an annual breakdown on the 31st of October

[arista]

Its a War out there in Pakistan
never ending.

[bots]

One really has to put things in context. Out of the entire population in the UK, how many are actually wearing burkas. It really isn't the most common attire, and its really not likely to increase to any extent

Burkhas in Pakistan are obviously a lot more common, and therefore it is a method of blending in. That just doesn't apply here. The point being that its impossible to equate the 2 countries and apply the same level of deception/threat because they are fundamentally different.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

One really has to put things in context. Out of the entire population in the UK, how many are actually wearing burkas. It really isn't the most common attire, and its really not likely to increase to any extent

Burkhas in Pakistan are obviously a lot more common, and therefore it is a method of blending in. That just doesn't apply here. The point being that its impossible to equate the 2 countries and apply the same level of deception/threat because they are fundamentally different.

I hope you are right, although of course there other objections to the wearing of it in the West as well, but I guess time will give us the only true answer - for the moment we can only speculate.

But if you are wrong and the wearing of it increases significantly it could be too late to change the attitudes that go hand-in-hand with the wearing of it. On this I would be happy to be proved wrong.

[Kizzy]

So what's the solution then, we keep it and have the same level of risk or ban it and risk the threat increase?
Personally I don't like them, not for any threat risk but purely the cultural subjugation it represents.

[Tom4784]

Your view is conflicted and incoherent though and your reasoning doesn't make it any less so. You are ignoring a real link in favour of your imaginary acts of violence committed by imaginary people avoiding escape by using Burkhas when multiple people in this topic have explained to you that, in the west, the Burkha is conspicuous, you can't get to wear you want without drawing attention to yourself and that's the last thing a terrorist wants before they attack.

I don't like the Burkha but I don't agree with taking away a woman's choice to wear it in areas that are not security risks.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Your view is conflicted and incoherent though and your reasoning doesn't make it any less so. You are ignoring a real link in favour of your imaginary acts of violence committed by imaginary people avoiding escape by using Burkhas when multiple people in this topic have explained to you that, in the west, the Burkha is conspicuous, you can't get to wear you want without drawing attention to yourself and that's the last thing a terrorist wants before they attack.

I don't like the Burkha but I don't agree with taking away a woman's choice to wear it in areas that are not security risks.

No it isn’t. The poster in question seemed to be confused as to who actually stated Terrorism had increased in France since the banning of the Burkha, and was attempting to imply I had said that when I suggested some reasons as to why I thought that was.

I have nothing more to say to you as I know exactly where this is going and I am not playing as I will be the obvious loser due to power imbalances.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

No it isn’t. The poster in question seemed to be confused as to who actually stated Terrorism had increased in France since the banning of the Burkha, and was attempting to imply I had said that when I suggested some reasons as to why I thought that was.

I have nothing more to say to you as I know exactly where this is going and I am not playing as I will be the obvious loser due to power imbalances.

Ah the ol 'I can't win the argument so I'm gonna make out that Dezzy will somehow decide to ban me if I try even though he hasn't misused his mod privileges in the 7+ years he's been one. '

I will take this post for what it is, an admission of defeat.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Ah the ol 'I can't win the argument so I'm gonna make out that Dezzy will somehow decide to ban me if I try even though he hasn't misused his mod privileges in the 7+ years he's been one. '

I will take this post for what it is, an admission of defeat.

You do that as I won’t give you the satisfaction.

[Oliver_W]

That general part of the world is a mess, people kill each other all the time over there. I bet they utilise burkhas fairly often too. But that has no relevance to face coverings here.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

That general part of the world is a mess, people kill each other all the time over there. I bet they utilise burkhas fairly often too. But that has no relevance to face coverings here.

And who made it a mess? who caused the present mayhem? Who trained ISIS? Who gave ISIS their weapons? Who invaded their countries? who toppled their governments? Who put sanctions on those countries, sanctions that killed hundreds of thousands of innocents? Are you even aware that for every westerner killed by a Muslim, a hundred Muslims have been killed by westerners and that includes 9/11.

Yes its a mess, but the west, mainly the U.S is responsible for much of that mess. The United States has killed a very large number of Muslim individuals over the past three decades and most of them were just innocent bystanders.

As tragic as it is when we see terrorist attacks on our own shores. As sad as it is to see our own innocent people being attacked by random Muslim terrorists; the saying, 'you reap what you sow' meaning, you will eventually have to face up to the consequence of your actions, has never been more meaningful than it has at this present time.

Every innocent life lost is a tragedy. Not understanding why this tragedy is happening to us in the hear and now is also a tragedy.

Edited to add: The propaganda would like us to believe our battle is with IS and yet we talk about Muslims and IS as though they were the same thing. IS kill Muslims. IS kill Christians. Who is our battle really with and who are we actually fighting?

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

.

Y'mean because of how peaceful the Middle East was before the Sykes-Picot Agreement?

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Y'mean because of how peaceful the Middle East was before the Sykes-Picot Agreement?

Our division of the Ottoman empire did change the course of history in the middle east and was an immoral act by the west that made that entire area more unstable and unpredictable. Everything since then has been about securing and preserving borders. Colonialism never really left the shores of that region. Whilst we became the protectorates of some, we became the enemies of others.

But I wasn’t meaning colonialism, though obviously that is the very root of the problem, I was talking war that was based on an American lie. Going in and leveling cities and re-establishing one puppet government with another. This was about taking over oil fields from an awkward dictator. It was about improving oil security for the U.S. This was about setting up a pricing cartel and save the U.S economy. The reason we took out Sadam ‘the axis of evil’ is because he switched oil from dollars to euros and the reason we are still gunning for Iran is because Iran did the same.

We, the West, have hardly minded our own business. Oil is more precious than gold and we got our hands very dirty in the handling of getting what we deemed to be our fare-share.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

...

We, we, we. I have no interest in collective blame. I can't take credit for white men on the moon, all muslims can't share the blame for terrorist acts, just like how Westerners in general can't share the blame for illadvised actions in the Middle East.

[Kizzy]

Can I just ask, who is sticking pegs in their hair...and why?

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Christmas treeza

Can I just ask, who is sticking pegs in their hair...and why?

Just a little Home vid he posted on here showing him putting pegs on his beard.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Just a little Home vid he posted on here showing him putting pegs on his beard.

Why bring that into a discussion about face coverings and murder? I'm sure at least a handful of people who want face coverings banned put pegs in strange places, but such eccentricities don't mean anything.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Just a little Home vid he posted on here showing him putting pegs on his beard.

Wait thats why haha? I thought it was some old fashioned phrase so I never even questioned it. (It wasn't actually me btw, interesting to know that you would reference a light hearted vid months later in a serious discussion as a personal put down. Quite telling of the type of person you are).

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

Wait thats why haha? I thought it was some old fashioned phrase so I never even questioned it. (It wasn't actually me btw, interesting to know that you would reference a light hearted vid months later in a serious discussion as a personal put down. Quite telling of the type of person you are).

There would be no need if you weren’t so quick to use personal put downs yourself - you were saying about being quite telling...