[westmanguy]

I don't care about the burqua that covers the hair. I still see it as regressive to women, but its the same category as wearing at a hat. But I'm sorry. In public - I want to see your face.

I wouldn`t be comfortable with somebody wearing a ski mask on the sidewalk. I hope France and eventually Quebec move to banning the niqab from public all together. If you want to wear that you can wear it in your house or mosque, not anywhere in public.

Don`t like it? Leave!

[Brenda]

westmanguy westmanguy:

I don't care about the burqua that covers the hair. I still see it as regressive to women, but its the same category as wearing at a hat. But I'm sorry. In public - I want to see your face.

Thats called a hijab (and I agree with you). A Burqa is a "dress" that covers you from head to toe, and has a net for the eyes
Hijab:

Burqa:

$1:

I wouldn`t be comfortable with somebody wearing a ski mask on the sidewalk. I hope France and eventually Quebec move to banning the niqab from public all together. If you want to wear that you can wear it in your house or mosque, not anywhere in public.

Don`t like it? Leave!

Agreed.

[Brenda]

CanadianTired CanadianTired:

Can't understand French without being able to see the speakers mouth?

How do they use the telephone in Quebec?

Haven't you heard? They don't. Only telemarketers do, and I dont understand a word they say

[rawmeat]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

rawmeat rawmeat:

CrazyCanuck007 CrazyCanuck007:

Quebec...Where racism lives....

Quebec, where people are not acting like politicaly correct pussies anymore.

Just remember that when Quebec passes its next anti-english language law to "protect its culture". I expect all your cheering and anti-"politically correct" rhetoric will suddenly fall silent?

So in your world you need to either agree 100% with everything that Quebec does or disagree 100% with everything Quebec does?

[Bodah]

According to beaver the Niqab and Language issues are one in the same, he's trying hard to lump it all under the protection of Quebec culture.

But because he hasn't taking a larger look at the issue this is something alot of us across the country can identify with and even want, what Quebec did. So culturally Quebec and the rest of us share the same thinking on the issue, its not a Quebec Culture only issue which he's trying to make it out to be. Not wearing a tent when a person leaves the house is something the rest of us acutally agree with as well. Probably the majority of the country I dare say.

So his attempt with linking it with Quebecs attack on minorities, language issues, bill 101 turned out to be an epic fail.

[whiskeyjack]

Its only a matter of time before someone dressed up in a table cloth will rob a store... Look at the kirpans, they said they are for sentimental reasons but last month someone in ontario used one to stab someone else, and there were other incidents before that also....

[BeaverFever]

Brenda Brenda:

Here, yet.

Who says its a woman?

Has this ever happened anywhere? Oh I know, suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan, but this is neither of those places.

[BeaverFever]

rawmeat rawmeat:

So in your world you need to either agree 100% with everything that Quebec does or disagree 100% with everything Quebec does?

Bodah Bodah:

According to beaver the Niqab and Language issues are one in the same, he's trying hard to lump it all under the protection of Quebec culture.

But because he hasn't taking a larger look at the issue this is something alot of us across the country can identify with and even want, what Quebec did. So culturally Quebec and the rest of us share the same thinking on the issue, its not a Quebec Culture only issue which he's trying to make it out to be. Not wearing a tent when a person leaves the house is something the rest of us acutally agree with as well. Probably the majority of the country I dare say.

So his attempt with linking it with Quebecs attack on minorities, language issues, bill 101 turned out to be an epic fail.

Guys, this is being defended by the Quebec politicians on exactly the same grounds as 101. It's not a coincedence that Quebec is the leader on this...the political tradition around "preserving their culture" runs deep and that's what's driving this. It's the same issue, preserving the French Nation from non-French. The will to use the notwithstanding clause exists and has been used considerably in that province, but barely anywhere else. Public opinion in Quebec is far stronger on this subject than in English Canada, as is the cross-party political will to pursue this. BQ, ADQ, Liberals, Conservatives are all on board in that province. It's the same premise as Bill 101 and enacted for the exact same reasons.

[Brenda]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

Brenda Brenda:

Here, yet.

Who says its a woman?

Has this ever happened anywhere? Oh I know, suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan, but this is neither of those places.

What were the suicide "girls" (17 and 20...) in Russia wearing?

Does it matter whether it happened anywhere or not? Noone has ever smuggled a bomb in a water bottle on a plane in Canada, right? Cant take my bottle on the plane tho.
Have to take my shoes off. How many shoebombers were there exactly that came from Canada or (in my case) The Netherlands?
Theo van Gogh was killed by a radical muslim. First time in The Netherlands.
Pim Fortuyn, a gay politician, was killed by a vegan. First time.

Knives are forbidden in schools. Were when I was young, and I have never seen anyone stabbed in my school.

This is no where close to anything, but still, we ALL have to deal with it. Why are some people more special than others?

[BeaverFever]

This isn't Russia, either. The muslim terrorists attacking Russia are not immigrants, they're part of a conflict that's been fighting Russian rule of their ancestral homeland for centuries, they're not immigrants. Chechnya and Dagestan (and I belive some others) are the muslim parts of the Russian and Soviet empires, which Russia refused to liberate when the Soviet Union broke up. Russia has active military campaigns in those regions and the two Chechen wars fought in the 1990s reduced entire cities to rubble. Last time I checked, the Canadian Forces had not reduced any Muslim neighbourhoods to rubble, nor was any province forcibly conquered from Muslims.

A niqab is not a bomb and banning it does not make anybody safer. None of the terror attacks you mentioned involved one. At least inspecting shoes and waterbottles (though arguably those tactics are just for show anyway) are responses to actual or attempted terrorist attacks. We could "what if" ourselves into martial law and military dictatorship if we wanted to.

People are just pissed at muslims because of the current issues invovling terrorism and this is one of the few outlets for their anger. There is no practical reason for it, "we want to see your face" is not a justifiable explanation or excuse, nor are made-up hypotheticals about "what if" somebody wore a niqab to rob a store. What if they wore a baseball hat and sunglasses, as they almost always do? Should we ban those too? What if someone grows a really big beard like Santa Claus?

[kenmore]

Beaver... you need to brush up on Québec and its culture. Bill 101 is being used by you to discredit the province. There is no co-relation between the issues. In Canada women have equal status and rights. There were no women seen wearing a grocery bag over their heads before we started allowing middle eastern immigration. There is no religious reason to wear a niqab, burka or hijab. I work with a female muslim doctor who wears nothing on her head. As this is a hot topic these days, I asked her and she said no where in the Qu'ran does it say a women has to cover her face and muslims are required to integrate and support the country they live in. She said that in 90% of the cases where women wear these it is because of family or husbands demanding it. Québec has a history of saying what everyone else thinks but are afraid to say it.. bottom line... if you come here integrate accept our laws and respect them... dont try and change us.. enjoy your relious freedoms in your own places of worship and your home.. and most importantly... if you don't like or follow the rules then go back to where you had no freedoms or rights.

[Brenda]

I bought my daughter a new cap the other day. She wore it to school the day after, but had to take it off in class.

I think I made my point.

[CrazyCanuck007]

rawmeat rawmeat:

So in your world you need to either agree 100% with everything that Quebec does or disagree 100% with everything Quebec does?

No, I'm just sick and tired of the stupid things that Quebec says and does to preserve their "French Culture"
Are you telling me that French Culture will die if there isn't french on my box of Fruit Loops here in BC? or my new DVD doesn't have french on it? or my stove doesn't have french on it?
French is spoken all over the world and you don't here of anti english being passed to preserve it!
If BC were to pass a law like Bill 101, every Quebecer would scream RACISM and we all know it!

[whiskeyjack]

Id like to see your face when i deal with you.... Theres no law saying you have to show it to me, but id appreciate it. Just like when im driving on the highway and the oncoming traffic switches off their high beams.... theres no law saying they have to turn off the high beams when i pass them but they still do it out of courtesy.... Something these dense muslims dont get

[DrCaleb]

whiskeyjack whiskeyjack:

Theres no law saying you have to show it to me, but id appreciate it. Just like when im driving on the highway and the oncoming traffic switches off their high beams.... theres no law saying they have to turn off the high beams when i pass them but they still do it out of courtesy.

Highway Traffic Act, Section 168.

$1:

168. When on a highway at any time when lighted lamps are required to be displayed on vehicles, the driver of a motor vehicle equipped with multiple beam headlamps shall use the lower or passing beam when,

(a) approaching an oncoming vehicle within 150 metres; or

(b) following another vehicle within 60 metres, except when in the act of overtaking and passing. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 168.

Offences:
Fail to use lower beam – oncoming - sec. 168(a) H.T.A. - fine $85
Fail to use lower beam – oncoming - (Community Safety Zone) sec 168 (a) - fine $120.
Fail to use lower beam – following - sec. 168(b) H.T.A. - fine $85
Fail to use lower beam – following - (Community Safety Zone) - sec 168(b) - fine $120.