Odd and surprising that they didn’t block this ban as “Islamophobic,” but it is refreshing to see common sense prevail. The veil is a security issue: it makes it too easy to commit crimes. And anyway, why are Europeans and North Americans the only ones forbidden to try to protect their cultural identity?
“European Court of Human Rights upholds Belgium’s ban on burqas and full-face Islamic veils,” by Lizzie Dearden, Independent, July 11, 2017:
Belgium’s ban on burqas and other full-face Islamic veils has been upheld by the European Court of Human Rights.
Judges said the nationwide prohibition, which came into effect in 2011, did not violate the rights to private and family life and freedom of religion, or discrimination laws.
The court found Belgium had the right to impose restrictions aiming to ensure the principles of “living together” and the “protection of the rights and freedoms of others”.
Its ruling said the government had been responding “to a practice that it considered to be incompatible, in Belgian society, with social communication and more generally the establishment of human relations, which were indispensable for life in society…essential to ensure the functioning of a democratic society”.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) dismissed two separate cases – one appealing Belgium’s nationwide ban and another on a 2008 by-law adopted by three municipalities.
The first case was brought by two women – Samia Belcacemi and Yamina Oussar – who previously attempted to have the law suspended and annulled at the Constitutional Court in Brussels.
In pictures: Protest against burkini bans in LondonThey both gave evidence on how the ban has affected their lives as Muslim women who choose to wear the niqab, which covers the face except for the eyes.
Ms Belcacemi said she initially continued to wear the veil in public but removed it over fear of being jailed or fined, while Ms Oussar said the law has forced her to stay at home….
Jean Terry says
I am surprised but glad they did this.
Rob says
QUOTE to a practice that it considered to be incompatible, in Belgian society, with social communication and more generally the establishment of human relations, which were indispensable for life in society…essential to ensure the functioning of a democratic society UNQUOTE.
The flip side to this, is that any appeal would have to prove that these things were NOT essential and that veil-wearers contributed fully to the functioning of a democratic society.
Doubt they could even come close to proving this.
Juhani says
I would not be surprised if this ban is enacted just to hide how far the islamization has gone. There are several indicators that show the number of muslim immigrants is much greater than officially reported.
Jihadi John says
COMMON MUSLIM TERMS
Taharrush Gamea: Arab gang-rape “game” where a gang of Arab males form a ring to surround and isolate a female victim from a crowd, and take turns raping her. Very popular in Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab world, Taharrush Gamea is now making inroads into western Europe.
Bacha Baazi: A form of entertainment involving child sexual abuse that is popular in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Prepubescent children dress up and dance in front of a group of Muslim men, and are sexually abused afterwards.
Sunat Perempuan: Female genital mutilation involving the cutting off the clitoris and often the inner labia as well. Although a standard practice among Muslims in Malaysia and Indonesia, local Buddhists, Hindus and animists never practice it.
Mutah: Prostitution, where the customer temporarily marries a prostitute (usually underage) to have sex with her, divorcing her after the act. Originating in 4:24 of the noble Qur’an, Mutah is widespread in Islamic Iran.
Mufakhathat: The Islamic practice of deriving sexual pleasure with girls, from newborns to six year olds. The practice involves rubbing the penis around the thigh area close to the vagina until ejaculation. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) practiced Mufakhathat with little Aisha.
Lucia Bartoli says
One cannot even determine if the burqa-wearer is male or female and that IS an even greater threat. Even police tend to be kinder with those they perceive to be female. Let every country retain their sovereign rights and laws and those who do NOT agree, should return to their own country of origin OR find a place that accommodates their lack of assimilation. I’m frankly done with Europe and will not ever go back. Tourism will soon be dead just as the victims of terrorism/rape are (Sweden, Germany, France, England). What in the heck is a “no go zone” in one’s own country especially in a previously wonderful neighborhood.
Michael Copeland says
What in the heck is a “no go zone”?
Dearborn? Hamtramck?
somehistory says
That photo, just seeing the eyes…how unhappy these creatures are…should convince many that the thing is a prison and symbol of slavery…to evil.
One might have sympathy for these women if they didn’t want other women and even tiny girls to be made to wear the slave garments. And if so many of them weren’t in favor of the rules of unholy, ungodly conduct inflicted upon all others…like murder of family members and rape of children and mutilation of little girls.
But a rational human does not sympathize with monsters and demons.
KRJ says
It is sickening to see women dressed that way. Utterly monstrous to force any human being to put that over them to cover them up. To imprison them. And yes, they are being forced. If they don’t wear it they will be shunned by their run-by-straggle-beards community and punished by their husbands and fathers. What are they doing here among us? Why do they “like it” in the West? They look straight out of some “invasion of the aliens” science fiction film! Disgusting. Scary.
Jerry says
Like Spencer said, these coverings make it too easy to commit crimes. But more than that, they are symbols of oppression for millions of women. They are chains of slavery made of cloth.
These rare moments of commonsense against islamic bigotry are encouraging.
…Ms Oussar said the law has forced her to stay at home….
Well, if you are “forced” to stay home then that’s proof enough the law is a good one. No woman should be forced to wear self-effacing and socially restricting garb. You are free now, hon. Go drink a beer and find yourself a good non-muslim man. Once you get treated like a lady you’ll never go back.
Matt says
They are struggling to stay relevant. They haven’t had a good last couple of years and are trying to win back the centre. This doesn’t change anything in terms of Islam’s impact on the West.
Guest says
Stupid of the Independent to mix this up with the burkini issue. Burkinis don’t cover the face, and though they were invented for medieval ‘modesty to not get sexually harassed’ reasons, wearing good UV protection at the beach makes sense for health reasons. It’s impossible to enforce at a beach, as there are so many outfits one might want to wear in the water.
gravenimage says
European Court of Human Rights upholds Belgium’s ban on burqas and full-face Islamic veils
………………..
A bit of sanity from Europe. Very welcome.
Andy says
Oh, my gosh! Do you think Europe is coming to it’s senses and decided they didn’t want to commit suicide after all?
Muslim Refugees: You’re Not Welcome In Europe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETuMWbM01rQ&t=1s
billybob says
I guess she told them where to stick it!
Charlie in NY says
Of course, had Israel passed such a law, the EU would be up in arms and the UN Human Rights Council would be called into emergency session. Oddly enough, Israel has not seen any necessity to ban such clothing or, for while we’re at it, prohibit the building of minaretsas Switzerland did – yet when Israel sought to limit the decibel level of the muezzin’s early morning call to prayer, the EU, among others, was all over it. Double standards?
Oliver says
Of course double standards.
Israel has contributed little to humanity and Muslims so much.
gravenimage says
So true, Oliver.
mortimer says
The Islamic veil’s purpose is FINANCIAL. The veil preserves the FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL of the first cousin to accept or REFUSE marriage to his FIRST COUSIN.
Most Muslims marry their first cousin and cause their inbred children to SUFFER HORRIBLY for a lifetime.
The Islamic veil’s purpose is to KEEP THE FAMILY MONEY AND PROPERTY IN THE FAMILY.
All Arabian Gulf countries have COMPULSORY GENETIC COUSELLING for marriage license applicants. There are more than 900 genetically-caused illnesses in Arabian countries.
CogitoErgoSum says
What better way to dehumanize a woman than to take away her face. Whoever came up with such an idea should have his own face erased from human memory. Oh wait, that would be Muhammad, wouldn’t it. Well …. everything else about him, including all his other ideas, should be erased and forgotten as well. I’d call that justice.
Chand says
But didn’t the Byzantine Christians start this veil thing which was adopted by the Arab prophet?
gravenimage says
Women in various societies in the ancient world wore the veil under certain circumstances–this predates both Christianity and Islam.
But Muslims are the only ones violently enforcing the veil today.
I note that Chand on another thread lauded Communist thugs and demanded that *all* religions be destroyed.
somehistory says
Women in the desert in ancient times, wore the veil and loose, flowing clothing to keep out the sand, limit sun exposure and allow in cooling breezes.
It was a *choice*..the control of whether or not rested with the women… before the nobody murderer, raper of children decided to make it mandatory for the women he could order about.
Steve Klein says
OT: Pope Francis allies accuse Trump White House of ‘apocalyptic geopolitics’
Article vetted by the Vatican offers scathing critique of Steve Bannon, who is Catholic, the Trump White House and ‘evangelical fundamentalism’ in the US
An explosive article written by two close associates of Pope Francis has accused Steve Bannon, the chief White House strategist, of espousing an “apocalyptic geopolitics” whose roots are “not too far apart” from that of Islamist extremism.
The article in La Civiltà Cattolica, which is vetted by the Vatican before publication, lays out a scathing critique of “evangelical fundamentalism” in the US, arguing that, on issues ranging from climate change to “migrants and Muslims”, proponents of the ideology have adopted a twisted reading of scripture and the Old Testament that promotes conflict and war above all else….
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/13/pope-associates-criticize-american-evangelicals-extremism
Tom says
“essential to ensure the functioning of a democratic society”.
In that one statement the court has encapsulated the very reason why there must be severe restrictions placed on Islam being practiced in western countries.
Restriction, not progibition, is the only thing that will work because courts will support restrictions on Islam for reasons of safety and compatability and as a result so will governments if they know the courts will uphold those restrictions.
Courts and governments will never support a complete ban on the practice of Islam.
The trick is to put on enough restrictions that we control Islam and its teachings in the west.
Of course we all know that muslims who practice Islam will revolt against any restrictions and will violently react, which then will force governments to further restrict and control them or identify and deport the leaders.
This decision is a first step in getting back control of the European countries.
dumbledoresarmy says
Anyone who has read the chapters on ‘the power of context’ in Malcolm Gladwell’s useful book “Tipping POint” knows that burka bans **if they are resolutely enforced** are not trivial matters, at all.
They should be enforced rigorously in the same way that , in NYC, a couple of decades ago now, crime on the subways was addressed, to begin with, by tackling the graffiti and then by full-on tackling the fare-jumpers. Mohammedan females in their intimidating face-masks (in-your-face Gang Uniform of the Mohammedan Mob) are challenging and flouting core principles of Infidel social interaction; they are , basically, the equivalent of the fare-jumpers (who often, when arrested and searched, turned out to be carrying weapons/ be in breach of bail conditions/ be wanted for unsolved crimes/ had arrest warrants outstanding against them).
A mohammedan female flaunting the Slave Mask in the public square requires to be treated – once the wearing of that mask is made illegal – *exactly* as the fare jumpers were treated. Arrest her. Female cops search her. Fingerprint her. Take down her details. Cross-check against immigration and citizenship records, welfare system records, and – fingerprints, dna sample – the unsolved crimes database. Assume nothing or rather, assume the worst. Have the sniffer dogs present to check for traces of explosives or other illegal substances. Women who wear the Slave Mask tend to have menfolk who are engaged in jihad plotting… men who might be cooking up bombs in her kitchen. If there are explosives and/ or illegal drugs in her house, whether she herself is actively involved in the concoction or not, the traces will show up on her clothes, on her person, and a good dog will sniff them out.
If this law is enforced properly, things could get really interesting. The burka and niqab-wearing females are, so to speak, the string that you pull and then all kinds of other stuff comes with it.
gravenimage says
+1
Linnte says
This will give other countries in the EU backing for banning the veil too. It makes me happy.
Lynn says
The purpose of the veil is to identify for Muslim men that the wearer is the property of another Muslim man and therefore must not be raped. A female who is not wearing the veil is available for sex either because she is a non-Muslim captive or a servant. The Koran 13:59 O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused.
gravenimage says
So true, Lynn.
denis says
I am always curious about who is behind all these Islamic court cases. It has to be some Islamic bigwig , mosque or Country. It costs hundreds of thousands of $$$$$$$ if not millions of $$$$$$ to bring these type of cases to court and these Muslim never seem to run out of money to PAY for EXPENSIVE lawyers.
Chand says
So what happened to the great, enlightened, rational principle called FREEDOM OF CHOICE? Isn’t it one of the foundations of the modern European civilization and the developed world?
A woman can expose most of her body publicly as a free choice but cannot cover herself??!!
So one is FREE to be shameless but is not FREE to be modest and shy?!
CAN ONE NOT WEAR WHAT ONE CHOOSES?
HOW MUCH CAN ONE EXPOSE? HOW MUCH CAN ONE NOT COVER?
Are we throwing out the baby too with the dirty water?
gravenimage says
Muslims have used the veil to attack Infidels.
The more I have seen of Chand–lauding Communist thugs and demanding that all religions have to be destroyed if we have a problem with Muslims raping and murdering us–I question whether he actually has a problem with Jihad at all.
Chand says
No gravenimage, I too want Jihadism destroyed. I don’t want Sharia law. I don’t want to get blown up! But how? Can I not voice my opinions too? Name calling………….’Communist thugs’, ‘Muhammad a paedophile’, ‘all muslims are rapists and murderers’ will not do at all. This is only garbage slinging, not a constructive discussion.