Discrimination against non Muslims?

andrewh5

I recently had a relative fly into Dublin. In front of her at the Garda immigration desk was a muslim woman dressed in a burqa so all that was visible were her eyes. The Garda apparently glanced at the woman's passport (which had a photo of her wearing a burqa) & waved her on. When my relative went to him he scrutinised her photo and her face quite intently.

Think now of the sign on bank doors. Most say something to the effect of 'Motorcyclists please remove helmets before entering the branch'. Now, as a biker myself, I know that you can see a lot more of someone's face behind a motorcycle helmet than you can behind a burqa yet muslim women wearing them do not have to lift the veil when the enter a bank.

The person behind the burqa could be anyone - male or female. One of the London bombers tried to flee the UK wearing a burqa. Why are we so stupid as to allow burqa wearers entry to the country and to banks without demanding that the burqa be lifted for identification purposes? Why do we accept passport & ID photographs with a person wearing a burqa?

Is this not some kind of discrimination against everyone who is not a muslim female burqa wearer? Is it not discrimination against motorcyclists?

Comments please.

Fratton Fred

You are perfectly entitled to wear a Burqa if you like. Just because it is traditional for Muslims, doesn;t mean you can't wear one.

905

Right-wing lamenters of the glory days of the Empire frequently complain about the hijacking of the term 'discrimination'. It used to mean good judgement, now it's a dirty word.

Generally they complain about complete lack of discrimination. You can't do anything that discriminates, even if it is important. A huge row was kicked up a while back about the British actively discriminating against young Muslim men in airport security. As a young man with a beard I can sympathise.

They will probably lament this tolerance of headgear as the latest example of lefty hypocrisy. Of course, they should be congratulating the bank on standing up for discrimination.

The real problem is the sexism. Expect a fiery polemic from Myers about the shabby treatment of beardy foreign men at airports while their bomb-carrying sisters are let waltz through...

905

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You are perfectly entitled to wear a Burqa if you like. Just because it is traditional for Muslims, doesn;t mean you can't wear one.

Back in the Sheik garda reserves debacle, I was a fan of the idea that the problem would be solved if all gardaí wore turbans.

El Stuntman

905 wrote: »

Back in the Sheik garda reserves debacle, I was a fan of the idea that the problem would be solved if all gardaí wore turbans.

Sikh surely, not Sheikh?? two very different things

anyway I like your thinking

905

El Stuntman wrote: »

Sikh surely, not Sheikh?? two very different things

anyway I like your thinking

Oooh, sorry I didn't swallow the pc guide to foreigne - sorry, interesting ethnicly diverse, enriching people. I suppose I deserve to be stoned now.

It wasn't my idea. It was a letter in either the Times or the Indo.

wes

905 wrote: »

Oooh, sorry I didn't swallow the pc guide to foreigne - sorry, interesting ethnicly diverse, enriching people. I suppose I deserve to be stoned now.

Being able to distinguish between 2 very different groups of people is hardly being PC. Its just common sense .

andrewh5

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You are perfectly entitled to wear a Burqa if you like. Just because it is traditional for Muslims, doesn;t mean you can't wear one.

I bet the Gardai would make you remove it for iedentification purposes if you had a male sounding voice and white hands though.

lostexpectation

don't worry andreh5 seeing you'll never leave the country it won't happen to you.

El Stuntman

andrewh5 wrote: »

I bet the Gardai would make you remove it for iedentification purposes if you had a male sounding voice and white hands though.

please, please try this out and report back to us with results

andrewh5

lostexpectation wrote: »

don't worry andreh5 seeing you'll never leave the country it won't happen to you.

What makes you think that?

andrewh5

El Stuntman wrote: »

please, please try this out and report back to us with results

I'm too busy with work. Please feel free to try it yourself though.

bonkey

andrewh5 wrote: »

The Garda apparently glanced at the woman's passport (which had a photo of her wearing a burqa) & waved her on.

How do you know what was on her passport photo?

Is this not some kind of discrimination against everyone who is not a muslim female burqa wearer? Is it not discrimination against motorcyclists?

Its possibly discrimination towards muslim female burka wearers who have passport photos of them wearing a burka.

It certainly isn't discrimination against anyone.

Comments please.

Rather than complaining that the rules apparently aren't being applied to some subset of travellers, you've complained that all travellers aren't being treated the same as this subset.

Its almost as though you're looking to make yourself hard done by.

andrewh5

bonkey wrote: »

How do you know what was on her passport photo?


Its possibly discrimination towards muslim female burka wearers who have passport photos of them wearing a burka.

It certainly isn't discrimination against anyone.


Rather than complaining that the rules apparently aren't being applied to some subset of travellers, you've complained that all travellers aren't being treated the same as this subset.

Its almost as though you're looking to make yourself hard done by.

Not at all. Is it right that burqa wearers are allowed to bypass correct facial identification? Surely it isn't. If all other females have to display their faces on their passport photographs and remove sunglasses etc when they go through immigration/security, so should burqa wearers? Surely it is a security issue?

El Stuntman

why is this thread in politics, should it not be moved to commuting and transport?

andrewh5

El Stuntman wrote: »

why is this thread in politics, should it not be moved to commuting and transport?

isn't political correctness a political issue then?

Gobán Saor

Surely her passport photo can't be of her wearing the burka? I mean that would be useless for identification purposes. There are strict requirements for Irish (and EU) passports which specify the type of face shot that's acceptable, ie no dark glasses, eyes open, white background etc. If other countries issue passports that don't allow visual identification of the carrier then we should simply refuse admission to those passport holders. (Or perhaps issue a special visa with acceptable photo ID?) Problem solved.

In any event, if it is deemed necessary to visually identify passport holders at passport control, then burkas, motorcycle helmets, balaclavas and any similar headgear should be removed. It's our country, our borders and (subject to EU law regarding freedom of movement for EU citizens) we are allowed set out our conditions for entry. And visual identification against a passport photo is an eminently reasonable entry requirement. If you don't like it, you don't have to come here.

andrewh5

Gobán Saor wrote: »

Surely her passport photo can't be of her wearing the burka? I mean that would be useless for identification purposes. There are strict requirements for Irish (and EU) passports which specify the type of face shot that's acceptable, ie no dark glasses, eyes open, white background etc. If other countries issue passports that don't allow visual identification of the carrier then we should simply refuse admission to those passport holders. (Or perhaps issue a special visa with acceptable photo ID?) Problem solved.

In any event, if it is deemed necessary to visually identify passport holders at passport control, then burkas, motorcycle helmets, balaclavas and any similar headgear should be removed. It's our country, our borders and (subject to EU law regarding freedom of movement for EU citizens) we are allowed set out our conditions for entry. And visual identification against a passport photo is an eminently reasonable entry requirement. If you don't like it, you don't have to come here.

I agree with you totally but I have two questions:
1/ Are immigration officials/Gardai/bank offisking them to lift their veils? I doubt it.
2/ Can you imagine the crys of islamophobia/racism that would occur if an official carried out that action?

the GALL

could they not just check the signatures on the passports?.
It's just a thought, or like the US do a finger print scan or retinal scan.

andrewh5

the GALL wrote: »

could they not just check the signatures on the passports?.
It's just a thought, or like the US do a finger print scan or retinal scan.

We don't have the technology here for retinal scans and signatures are notorious to forge. Why can't they just lift the veil? There is absolutely nothing in the Q'uran that says they must cover their faces anyway so it is not a religious requirement.

Fratton Fred

andrewh5 wrote: »

We don't have the technology here for retinal scans and signatures are notorious to forge. Why can't they just lift the veil? There is absolutely nothing in the Q'uran that says they must cover their faces anyway so it is not a religious requirement.

They are made to lift their veil in a lot of countries, most airports have a private room in which this can be done. If the women was travelling on an EU passport though, they may not have considerd this necessary.

rowlandbrowner

jaysus, all this pc nonsence, white middleclass men have never had it so bad....

Airport authorities are simply trying to make a balance between security fears and not offending somebody’s culture. Its pains me to hear people argue that white Christians with no distinguishing cultural traits for the authorities to politely excuse are somehow the ones being discriminated. Maybe I’m a deluded lefty but in my opinion people who think PC - which is fundamentally a law to insure people are threated fairly - is somehow a bad thing are idiots. The same type of idiots who vote bnp and read those rags produced by Murdoch.

meditraitor

andrewh5 wrote: »

I recently had a relative fly into Dublin. In front of her at the Garda immigration desk was a muslim woman dressed in a burqa so all that was visible were her eyes. .

Strangely enough I never considered the fact that some muslim woman have a picture of a burkha covered head on their passport.
I believe strongly that they should be refused entry if they dont show their face.

andrewh5 wrote: »

Is it not discrimination against motorcyclists?

.

Your answering your own question ;-

andrewh5

rowlandbrowner wrote: »

jaysus, all this pc nonsence, white middleclass men have never had it so bad....

Airport authorities are simply trying to make a balance between security fears and not offending somebody’s culture. Its pains me to hear people argue that white Christians with no distinguishing cultural traits for the authorities to politely excuse are somehow the ones being discriminated. Maybe I’m a deluded lefty but in my opinion people who think PC - which is fundamentally a law to insure people are threated fairly - is somehow a bad thing are idiots. The same type of idiots who vote bnp and read those rags produced by Murdoch.

You said it & i don't read any Murdoch rags or vote BNP. I am concerned that PC is going too far. If we moved to Saudi Arabia would we expect our wives/girlfriends/daughters to be able to walk around in belly tops & mini skirts & drive cars? The answer is no because Saudi law prohibits all of those. Given that, why do we allow muslim women to dress in burqas or at least not lift their veils for identification purposes? As another poster has said, some countries do insist on it.

the GALL

andrewh5 wrote: »

We don't have the technology here for retinal scans and signatures are notorious to forge. Why can't they just lift the veil? There is absolutely nothing in the Q'uran that says they must cover their faces anyway so it is not a religious requirement.

Have you read the Q'uran(koran)
4:34 Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other,and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts beacuse GGod has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them, forsake them in beds (or bedrooms) apart, and beat them. then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surlely God is hihg, supreme.
And here's some more
24:30 enjoin believing men to turn their eyes away from temptation and to restrain their carnel desires. This will make their lives purer. God has knowledge of all their actions.
Enjoin believing women to turn their eyes away from tempetation and to preserve thier chastity; Not to display their adornments (except such as are normally revealed); to draw veils over their bosoms and not to display their finery except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands fathers, their sons, their step sons, their brothers, their brothers son's their sisters' sons, their women servents and their girls; male attendents lacking in neutral vigour, and children who have no carnel knowledge of women. And let them not stamp their feet when walking so as to reveal their hidden trinkets.
Believers turn to God in your penitence, that you may prosper.

Allah akbar

Read the book then post.

andrewh5

the GALL wrote: »

Have you read the Q'uran(koran)
4:34 Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other,and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts beacuse GGod has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them, forsake them in beds (or bedrooms) apart, and beat them. then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surlely God is hihg, supreme.
And here's some more
24:30 enjoin believing men to turn their eyes away from temptation and to restrain their carnel desires. This will make their lives purer. God has knowledge of all their actions.
Enjoin believing women to turn their eyes away from tempetation and to preserve thier chastity; Not to display their adornments (except such as are normally revealed); to draw veils over their bosoms and not to display their finery except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands fathers, their sons, their step sons, their brothers, their brothers son's their sisters' sons, their women servents and their girls; male attendents lacking in neutral vigour, and children who have no carnel knowledge of women. And let them not stamp their feet when walking so as to reveal their hidden trinkets.
Believers turn to God in your penitence, that you may prosper.

Allah akbar

Read the book then post.

Nowt about covering faces there :rolleyes:
Says a lot about it being a loving religion tha treats women as equals too which a lot of islamic supporters claim :rolleyes:

the GALL

Read it again or will I put it in capitals and put more spaces in.

andrewh5

NOTHING about veils over faces! Veils over bosoms yes. faces NO. Unless of course you are just reading into the text what you want to see?

Oh and god is not great. S/he is a fairy story but that's another post.

the GALL

andrewh5 wrote: »

NOTHING about veils over faces! Veils over bosoms yes. faces NO. Unless of course you are just reading into the text what you want to see?

Oh and god is not great. S/he is a fairy story but that's another post.

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?
The muslim also abstains from alcohol ....that's wrong?
The muslim ceases trade on friday's ......that's wrong?
The muslim don't eat pork......now that's definitaly wrong?
I think your just jumping on the band wagon. Have you been outside the state?, it really is nice with lot's of different culture's and people

djpbarry

andrewh5 wrote: »

Can you imagine the crys of islamophobia/racism that would occur if an official carried out that action?

No. What would it be like?

andrewh5 wrote: »

Given that, why do we allow muslim women to dress in burqas ...

You think that women should be told how to dress?

Raintonite

After working in London, we sped down the road to Holy head and bought a ticket from Holy Head at the last minute for the ferry to Dublin. When security heard our accents they immediatedly stopped us and took us in for questioning one by one. We obviously missed the ferry and couldn't get a refund. When did this happen? In July 1979. No, in July 2007. We have Ulster accents although we all live in the republic. Obviously, the "authorities" in Wales hadn't heard about the cease-fire and the new arrangements. After being kept from the first ferry, and knowing we were "legitimate" passangers they tried the same caper the next morning. Only until I, as the driver, said they wouldn't do this to a black man in public hearing did they let us go on our way. Figure.

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.