Denmark bans full face veils.

cnocbui

cagefactor wrote: »

Haven't seen such leaflet, I was in Doha last month, alot of girls in the malls wearing skirts. If go out to the bars or clubs it is even more prevalent.

That would be a good example why 'I saw this...' personal anecdotes are of limited relevance.

SNNUS

Dress code in Doha Qatar
Although Qatar clothing has changed over the years, Qataris are proud of their clothing, and traditional clothes are worn with pride on daily basis. Qatar is an Islamic country, and people dress in a very traditional manner.

Although there is no dress code as such, for foreigners, it is better to wear modest clothes, and conservative clothing is recommended. This implies no shorts for men, and no mini-skirts or tank tops for women. Foreign visitors are expected to dress in a style that is sensitive to Islamic culture.

Gwen Cooper

cnocbui wrote: »

Qatar you say...:

From a Qatar guide:

Qatar is an Islamic country, and people dress in a very traditional manner. Although there is no dress code as such, for foreigners, it is better to wear modest clothes, and conservative clothing is recommended. This implies no shorts for men, and no mini-skirts or tank tops for women.

4068ac1elhodqr

Grayson wrote: »

Then you have to ban everything that covers a face. Halloween costumes, motorbike helmets, joke fake beards etc... You also have to show that these face coverings have impeded the security forces/police in their job.

Was in a bank few years ago, there was a sign at the door saying 'please remove motorbike helmets', looked over my shoulder when in the que and was surprised to see what can only be described as three ladies in balaclavas (ffv) right behind.

Facial regonition (and gait) has advanced at a stunning pace, in China recently a single wanted criminal was located using this tech in a packed stadium of 30,000.

It's only a matter of time before everyones face is stored on networked cloud system in the interest of pre-crime detection, and prevention. Any repeat shoplifter will find themselves quickly redundant.

steves2

I read that article posted a couple pages back, in one way I sympathise with immigrants living in Denmark as they are not the warmest people. It can take effort to become friends with a Dane* but once you do they are great, very open minded and relaxed. They are more nationalistic than us, the flag is everywhere and on everything, I wouldn't have a problem with that but I am glad we are not like that I have to say.

I think that they are very proud of the society they've built and they may feel the influx of immigrants, who may have different values, threatens the values they hold or will lead to abuse of their generous welfare system.

I think that they are free to pass laws like this and I wouldn't be totally against it, imo they are very progressive and this is something that a majority of them agree with, so they enact it.

*I also hear this comment from non-Irish people living here!

DrumSteve

Charlie Embarrassed Splint wrote: »

Was in a bank few years ago, there was a sign at the door saying 'please remove motorbike helmets', looked over my shoulder when in the que and was surprised to see what can only be described as three ladies in balaclavas (ffv) right behind.

Facial regonition (and gait) has advanced at a stunning pace, in China recently a single wanted criminal was located using this tech in a packed stadium of 30,000.

It's only a matter of time before everyones face is stored on networked cloud system in the interest of pre-crime detection, and prevention. Any repeat shoplifter will find themselves quickly redundant.

There is a joke to be made there but I don't want to be permabanned.

7aubzxk43m2sni

cnocbui wrote: »

The tradition and custom that we in the West don't require women to wear such and that such items are not worn in the current era.

Thats neither a tradition nor a custom, and we don't have one stating that women have to show their faces, therefore they should be entitled to wear what they want.

wes

wakka12 wrote: »

Thats a ridiculous strawman. It goes without saying that we treat our citizens and every foreign citizen better than Saudi and Iran do, and even with a veil ban we would still have much higher standards of minority rights than those countries.

Not a strawman, when people invoke those countries to justify the Burqa ban. Its has been done several times already on this thread, and is a common argument offered whenever this topic comes up.

7aubzxk43m2sni

Charlie Embarrassed Splint wrote: »

Was in a bank few years ago, there was a sign at the door saying 'please remove motorbike helmets', looked over my shoulder when in the que and was surprised to see what can only be described as three ladies in balaclavas (ffv) right behind.

Facial regonition (and gait) has advanced at a stunning pace, in China recently a single wanted criminal was located using this tech in a packed stadium of 30,000.

It's only a matter of time before everyones face is stored on networked cloud system in the interest of pre-crime detection, and prevention. Any repeat shoplifter will find themselves quickly redundant.

Do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing?

cnocbui

Mathias Brave Rakish wrote: »

Thats neither a tradition nor a custom, and we don't have one stating that women have to show their faces, therefore they should be entitled to wear what they want.

Wrong on all counts.

7aubzxk43m2sni

cnocbui wrote: »

Wrong on all counts.

Ok, please elaborate how?

riffmongous

Charlie Embarrassed Splint wrote: »

Was in a bank few years ago, there was a sign at the door saying 'please remove motorbike helmets', looked over my shoulder when in the que and was surprised to see what can only be described as three ladies in balaclavas (ffv) right behind.

Facial regonition (and gait) has advanced at a stunning pace, in China recently a single wanted criminal was located using this tech in a packed stadium of 30,000.

It's only a matter of time before everyones face is stored on networked cloud system in the interest of pre-crime detection, and prevention. Any repeat shoplifter will find themselves quickly redundant.

Or dissenter. I was at a few demonstrations against a far right party the last years and the police were there filming everything, ostensibly for the case of violence, which would be fair enough, if they just delete all the data afterwards if there is no trouble, but I very much doubt that. And I'm not sure I like the idea of being on a database somewhere just for exercising my democratic right to protest, especially now that particular party is in power and very cosy with the cops

4068ac1elhodqr

DrumSteve wrote: »

There is a joke to be made there but I don't want to be permabanned.

And that demonstrates just how powerful the technology is.

Mathias Brave Rakish wrote: »

Do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing?

Both (privacy vs crime reduction), but is also a 'non-preventable' technological development.

As such it would be unfair for groups to be made exempt of it.

cnocbui

Mathias Brave Rakish wrote: »

Ok, please elaborate how?

Er - the fact that western women have not habitually covered their faces in public for many generations. That makes an uncovered face both customary and traditional, by definition.

cdeb

Mathias Brave Rakish wrote: »

Ok, please elaborate how?

See my post on page 3 on how showing your face is utterly fundamental to human culture worldwide, and has been for tens of thousands of years.

Malayalam

Veils per se can be very beautiful, head scarves, shawls, drapings of various kinds that have been traditionally worn - they accentuate beauty rather than dehumanise the wearer. But the full black burqa is such an ugly thing, so impractical in heat, almost sinister looking, designed (to my eye) to impede, restrain, imprison, hobble, to declare ownership and control of the wearer. I was glad to hear they have been banned in Denmark. I hope they eventually get banned everywhere on the planet. I detest them, really - they are such a symbol of abuse.
Samina Ali gives a talk here on the origin of burqa. It's interesting. There are also more esoteric interpretations one could argue for, such as the veil being a symbol of the human having to protect the delicate soul from the worldly eye. It is thus metaphorical and should have always been interpreted on that level. But the scriptures have been wrongly interpreted now for reasons of power and subjugation. It has nothing to do with choice, empowerment, modesty, being lady like, being compliant to ones culture.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_J5bDhMP9lQ

RebelButtMunch

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

White socks with sandals

cnocbui wrote: »

Er - the fact that western women have not habitually covered their faces in public for many generations. That makes an uncovered face both customary and traditional, by definition.

neither have men, or dogs. Does that make it customary and traditional?

jmayo

Charlie Embarrassed Splint wrote: »

Was in a bank few years ago, there was a sign at the door saying 'please remove motorbike helmets', looked over my shoulder when in the que and was surprised to see what can only be described as three ladies in balaclavas (ffv) right behind.

Facial regonition (and gait) has advanced at a stunning pace, in China recently a single wanted criminal was located using this tech in a packed stadium of 30,000.

It's only a matter of time before everyones face is stored on networked cloud system in the interest of pre-crime detection, and prevention. Any repeat shoplifter will find themselves quickly redundant.

Casinos in all the major gambling centres use facial recognition to catch the likes of card counters entering.
There is a worldwide database so if you are caught in Vegas and turn up in Atlantic City, the likes of Monte Carlo or Macau you can be quickly pulled aside and dumped out.
The day is gone when the likes of MIT gang can get into a casino anywhere in the world to do their stuff.

Hell in Macau they are introducing facial recognition at ATMs to check who is withdrawing major amounts of money.

I applaud the Danes who have shown balls.
It is laughable how some are playing this as denying human rights when I believe every human has the right to know who or what is in front of them, rather than a pillbox with two eyes staring out.

Actually the worse face covering has even mesh over the eyes.

cnocbui

RebelButtMunch wrote: »

neither have men, or dogs. Does that make it customary and traditional?

Of course.

7aubzxk43m2sni

Charlie Embarrassed Splint wrote: »

And that demonstrates just how powerful the technology is.



Both (privacy vs crime reduction), but is also a 'non-preventable' technological development.

As such it would be unfair for groups to be made exempt of it.

I don't think they're being "made exempt" from it, that implies an active decision to not target them with the technology. Allowing them to wear their choice of clothing is not the same.

RebelButtMunch

cnocbui wrote: »

Of course.

I have to say, you've given me a laugh. Fair play.

7aubzxk43m2sni

cnocbui wrote: »

Er - the fact that western women have not habitually covered their faces in public for many generations. That makes an uncovered face both customary and traditional, by definition.

Fair enough.

There is still a significant difference in "not requiring" women to have their faces uncovered, and demanding that they have their faces uncovered.

Mr.H

Grayson wrote:

How many women in burka's commit crimes? Is there a gang of them wandering around Denmark sneaking into banks and robbing them?

In the middle east a lot do. Can't be sure if they ate women or men of course because they are covered. Very often extremists will wear these clothes to both blend into the crowd and to hide their identity. They shoot at soldiers and disappear back into the crowd.

Do not be so naive.

You support removing helmets entering a bank but what about a full veil? Should that not be removed also?

When you are in the middle east you must adhere to their values. So why can't we instill ours?

To be honest I would've further and ban any clothing that hides your identity

thebull85

Well done Denmark.

The_Kew_Tour

Denmark have the right to do as they please even if it upsets the usual here.

7aubzxk43m2sni

jmayo wrote: »

It is laughable how some are playing this as denying human rights when I believe every human has the right to know who or what is in front of them, rather than a pillbox with two eyes staring out.

Do they though? Should we, given this right, be able to demand a child removes their halloween mask because we have the right to know who is in front of us?

thebull85

riffmongous wrote: »

It's also a handy law to sneak in a way to ban demonstrators from hiding their faces

The only demonstrators that cover their faces are the cowardly antifa, so im all for this.

7aubzxk43m2sni

thebull85 wrote: »

Well done Denmark.

A small victory against the Muslims, time to celebrate.

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Denmark have the right to do as they please even if it upsets the usual here.

Who are the usual here?

thebull85

Mathias Brave Rakish wrote: »

A small victory against the Muslims, time to celebrate.



Who are the usual here?

Any problem with what i said?

wes

thebull85 wrote: »

The only demonstrators that cover their faces are the cowardly antifa, so im all for this.

Sure, and you can prove that only antifa cover there faces. Care to provide evidence from every demonstration across the entire planets history to prove this ridiculous claim. After all extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

OK, I don't expect you do to do that, I am just taking the piss, but anyone who has ever watched the news, will have seen plenty of instance of various demonstrators of various ideologies covering there faces.

I do wonder why people make such clearly false statements sometimes.