Turkey's Constitutional Court steps in to block the Islamization of secular Turkey -- at least in this one particular. "Court annuls Turkish scarf reform," from the BBC, June 5 (thanks to all who sent this in):
Turkey's highest court has blocked government moves to allow college students to wear Muslim headscarves.The Constitutional Court said that a vote by parliament to ease a ban on scarves being worn on campuses violated the constitution's secular principles.
The government argues that a headscarf ban stops many girls being educated.
Yes, for we all know how deeply Islamic supremacists and jihadists are committed to the education of women.
But much of the secular establishment resisted the move, seeing it as a step towards allowing Islam to figure more largely in Turkish public life.The ruling, by a panel of 11 judges, could foreshadow the outcome of a separate court case in which the ruling AK Party (AKP) could be banned for anti-secular activities....
That would be a consummation devoutly to be wished. But would it stop the Islamization of Turkey, which enjoys broad popular support? Not certain.
This is Good News.
AKP will be in disarray over this, awaiting what the constitutional court will do the party itself, now that the foundation for the case against them has been solidly upheld.
It's a bizarre struggle in Turkey...where the Europeans - through their power to set conditions on Turkey's entry into the EU, seem to be the most aggressive advocates of Islamization after the AKP itself.
Robert makes the salient point: whatever momentary legal mechanisms the secular establishment uses to maintain its prerogatives, the sentiments of the Turkish public are readily apparent given the continued electoral success of the AKP.
Oh, boy... This is not going to be a popular comment.
I'm against enforced dress codes. I don't think Muslim women, nor any other woman should be forced to wear any garment, especially Islamic dress.
That said, I'm also against banning articles of clothing or jewelry that expresses a person's identification with his or her religion of choice. It may start with Fatimah's hijab, and end with my St. Mary Magdalene medal. It's one of those "Where do you draw the line" things.
If these college campuses were private schools, it would be a different matter.
Personally, I'm all for Muslim women voluntarily wearing their sackcloth and ashes, and I think Muslim men should be encouraged to wear hijab as well. I want to be able to identify them and avoid them.
"It may start with Fatimah's hijab, and end with my St. Mary Magdalene medal."
The huge difference between these two is that Islam's "God" orders "the believing women" to cover-up, both head and body. That is what the hijabed-females always say.
Conversely, Christianity's God orders no one to sport a medal of any kind, or even a Cross. Total free choice.
Also, to me, a head covering is very "aggressive," much more so than a small medal, which can also be worn underneath clothes. The hijab sends a big fat unmistakeable message called ISLAM. It's in your face. It reminds me of the knee-length black leather storm trooper SS boots - intimidating and aggressive as all-get-out. In your face. Unmistakeable sartorial message: NAZI.
"But much of the secular establishment resisted the move, seeing it as a step towards allowing Islam to figure more largely in Turkish public life."
In the UK they use a different tactic, they murder people on trains on their way to work. The government here then bends over backwards to give muslims ever more power and say in the running of my country just so they don't feel "blamed".
How stupid is that!?
Without their headscarves, Turkish coeds would be unprotected from................... Turkish muslim men?
And exactly why should the EU welcome Turkey?
And exactly why should the EU welcome Turkey?
Posted by: tanstaafl at June 6, 2008 12:23 PM
No reason. No reason at all.
Just for the lies that are Multiculturalism and Political Correctness.
IMO, as soon as Turkey is admitted into the EU, back the headscarves will go.
And exactly why should the EU welcome Turkey?
No reason whatsoever.
Except the European Union loves to launch ever-larger projects, until their incompetence is exposed for all to see.
You think the US Federal government is doing a bad job? Just watch what the EU Commission is undertaking! And they're not even subject to a public vote, and can't be dismissed.
Turkey didn't live up to the precondition to apply for EU membership. Commission allowed them to apply nonetheless. They didn't execute the promises reforms either, nor recognize Cyprus or grant the Kurds proper minorities' rights. Commission "watches the situation closely" - and ignores it.
They should not merely be fired for incompetence, but hanged.
For an interesting perspective on the significance of the headscarf (and related forms of Islamic female coverup) see (on Victor David Hanson's site) Raymond Ibrahim's review of a Tawfik Hamid book, Inside Jihad.
Here's the link: http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/ibrahim032608.html
and here's the money quote. Ibrahim writes -
'Hamid also makes the intriguing observation that [QUOTE] “the proliferation of the hijab is strongly correlated with increased terrorism…. Terrorism became much more frequent in such societies as Indonesia, Egypt, Algeria, and the U.K. after the hijab became prevalent among Muslim women living in those communities.” UNQUOTE
Islam is such a 'high-context' system that the simple fact of a woman's wearing, or not wearing, varying degrees of hijab, has enormous weight. (Perhaps Malcolm Gladwell's book 'Tipping Point', the chapter entitled 'the power of context' could be profitably examined, at this point).
Ataturk understood that.
Perhaps it is not, therefore, coincidence that out of all the countries of the Infidel world it was the French - perhaps the most fashion-savvy, clothing-conscious culture of any in the West, the people who invented haute couture - who instinctively sensed the significance of the hijab. They sensed they had to do something about it. So they made a start in the heart and centre of their culture: they banned the hijab in French schools.
Without knowing that they knew, or knowing *how* they knew, they KNEW, perhaps by sheer gut instinct, that the hijab meant much, much more than Muslims were letting on that it meant. The sheer rightness of the French decision was demonstrated in spades by the pure rage with which it was met, in the Islamosphere.
Obvious conclusion: the hijab is NOT to be innocently equated with the nun's wimple, the priest's dog-collar, the yarmulke, the kippah, the crucifix or the star of david or the Sikh turban and sword or the sacred string of a Brahmin. It is not the same sort of thing as any of those symbols. It is NOT about 'modesty'.
It is a POLITICAL symbol. It might even be taken as code for the whole Islamic dominance/ submission tyranny-slavery system.
And because of the nature of that system, that classical Islam seeks to enforce world wide by hook or by crook, the hijab (be it headscarf, burqa, niqab, you-name-it) should be BANNED altogether not just in schools but in every part of the Infidel lands. Banned just as thoroughly as if it were the Nazi flag.
A few further thoughts in the light of Hamid's observations about the correlation between Muslim women 'covering' and men engaging in jihad.
1. Wherever, right now, we see a lot of Muslim women going about in obvious hijab, and the more extreme the form of coverup adopted (e.g. full face-covering as opposed to a wisp of scarf) - one might be wise to assume that there are jihad plots a-hatching in the same vicinity.
2. The chicken-egg question arises: is the 'covering' a symptom, or a cause, of the concomitant male aggression? Or perhaps it doesn't matter: whichever happens first, they will then keep on mutually reinforcing each other.
3. It may seem silly to think that resolutely enforcing a ban on the hijab might lessen the drive toward jihad and sharia. But maybe it isn't. Again: read Malcolm Gladwell on 'the power of context', in Tipping Point.
And so we return to the eminent advisability of ALL Infidel nations banning the hijab.
Start in the state schools, the colleges and the university campuses, like the French. UK schools, Danish schools, Dutch schools, Italian schools. Australia, Canada, the USA, New Zealand. If we really want to do it, we can. The more noise the Muslims make about it, the more important it will be for the infidel authorities to dig in their toes and grit their teeth and enforce it, by whatever means it takes.
And it should be also possible to enforce a 'street' ban on at least the burqa/ niqab, on those extreme forms of Islamic female covering that conceal the entire face and sometimes even the eyes, on the grounds of the real and demonstrable threat to public safety. NO-ONE should be able to conceal their identity so completely from others in shops, streets, public transport - the possibilities for various forms of crime are obvious, and endless.
And NO-ONE should be exempt. Every Saudi male who enters the West should be made to understand that the moment his wife/ wives steps onto Western soil, that obscene face-veil must be left behind on the plane. If not, well, sir, I'm afraid the lady cannot enter the country.
It is a POLITICAL matter, not a religious matter. darcy and I have both, already, compared the hijab to the Nazi uniform. Another comparison might be with the garb of the Ku Klux Klan. If someone paraded into a bank, or a shop, in full Ku Klux Klan hood and robe, do you think they would be viewed with complacency?
dumbledoresarmy~
And that could be a place to start. The next time a case comes up where a women demands her right to wear face covering, a brave group could get together and show up in the court or outside the court in full KKK covering hood and see what the press does about it ~ just to prove a point. You would probably be arrested and the case made that the KKK hood is political not religious but many times the case has been made that the KKK is religious. I would like to see the press go nuts over it.