The Tennessean: Davidson sheriff’s booking policy eases rules on religious headwear

A Muslim woman told to remove the veil covering her face to pose for a jail mugshot has prompted the Davidson County Sheriff’s Office to revise its policy regarding religious headwear.

Beginning Friday, a person wearing face-covering religious headwear who is being booked into the jail will have two mugshots — one with the coverings on; the other will be taken with the headwear removed from the person’s face.

The second shot will be taken in the presence only of a same-sex guard, be kept in a confidential file, and opened only through judicial order, said Karla Weikal, sheriff’s office spokeswoman.

The same rule applies at security checkpoints at Justice A.A. Birch Criminal Justice Building, Historic Metro-Nashville Courthouse and Davidson County Juvenile Justice Center. If someone wearing a type of religious headwear sets off a metal detector at the entrance, the person will be taken to a private room by a guard of the same sex. There, the person will remove the headdressing and be screened.

While local civil rights and religious leaders Tuesday applauded the revisions, some Middle Tennessee law enforcement officials said the sheriff’s office might be taking things a bit too far.

“…taking things a bit too far”?

Gee, ya think?

“We respect religious rights, but sometimes common sense has to play in here a little bit,” said Wilson County Sheriff Terry Ashe. “I don’t care if it’s Bubba with a cowboy hat or if it’s a religious situation, for everyone’s safety, we’re going to take a mugshot, and when it comes to booking photos, I’m going to have to see who you are.”

The Muslim woman who was told to remove her veils for her booking photo in Davidson County contacted the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, which started in April negotiating with the sheriff’s office about changes to its religious accommodation policy. That policy took effect in 1998 but is modified each year…

Read it all.

This is perfectly ridiculous.

Nobody in the US has any business wearing facial disguise in public to begin with, much less committing a crime with it on.

In the US or any other non-Muslim nation, facial disguise (the burqa, or the hijab and niqab, or anything else) violates our own social mores. As a way of verifying identity and establishing the level of trust that allows our society to function, we expect that persons of both sexes and all ages go about in public with their faces and heads exposed. Not only the face itself, but also the neck, ears, head shape, and hair, form part of the visual cues that we use to recognize and identify one another.

When we see someone whose face is concealed, other than during a masquerade event or in exceedingly cold weather (uncommon in Tennessee), we wonder whether that person is getting ready to loot a store, rob a bank, throw a bomb, join a lynch mob, or commit other violent crimes. Considering the facial disguises worn by many of the recent rioters in the UK, our mistrust is well founded.

Not About Modesty

Burqa-wearers claim that their “modesty” is offended by any attempts to get them to doff their facial disguise. That’s hogwash! In our part of the world, modesty is all about not attracting undue attention to oneself. Going around with a bag over one’s head and body is the antithesis of modesty. It is all about confrontation; it is a test to see whether we will back down. One reason why Muslimas wear the burqa in Tennessee is because it puts pressure on non-Muslims. Even the hijab alone, by which I mean just the head/neck scarf, without the niqab (i.e., the face veil), serves as an “in your face” confrontation. The hijab is a visual sign of the wearer’s rejection of the customs and the community ties of native-born Americans and even of the sensibilities of those immigrants who came to the US because they approve of what we stand for (or of what the US once stood for). It is an implied statement that normal American women who do not cover their heads are somehow “immodest.”

If you cannot cope with the idea of your face being exposed in public, then you do not belong in this part of the world. Just go home immediately, take your friends and family with you, and never come back. Or don’t come here in the first place!

Security Risk

The burqa is an unacceptable security risk, even in Muslim countries! There is no way to know who (male, female, criminal, terrorist) or what (contraband, including BOMBS) might be under that burqa. By the time the authorities apprehend the suspect and remove the disguise, it may be too late to prevent a massacre or other major disaster. This is why the burqa is banned in some countries and cities.

“Religious headgear”?

Calling the burqa “religious headgear” is a whitewash in and of itself. What kind of “religion” expects teenage girls and adult women go around with bags over their heads? I contend that Islam is not a religion at all, but rather, an enemy, totalitarian, expansionist political ideology that seeks to rid the world of everything but itself. There is no reason why we need to give any totalitarian ideology the First Amendment protection that belongs to the free exercise of religion. In fact, according to the Qur’an, the stated goal of Islam is to encroach upon and destroy our own freedom to reject Islam!

Why is Davidson County so important?

Davidson County’s policy on shari’a law is important because Davidson County exercises jurisdiction over a populous metropolitan area that is also the capital of Tennessee.

According to Wikipedia:

Davidson County is a county located in the U.S. state of Tennessee. As of 2010, the population was 626,681. Its county seat is Nashville.[1]

In 1963, the City of Nashville and the Davidson County government merged, so the county government is now known as the “Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County,” or “Metro Nashville” for short.

Nashville is also the capital of Tennessee. The upshot is that decisions that are made in Davidson County will not only affect “Metro Nashville” but also exert influence upon the entire State.

Blog admins 1389 and CzechRebel have been to Nashville. We both vehemently oppose the ongoing Muslim attempts to infiltrate the Southern US and to impose a parallel system of shari’a law upon it. We are far from alone in this. The South continues to be a bastion of Judaeo-Christian civilization, which is why the tranzi-progressive/pro-jihadi axis constantly bashes Southerners as “rednecks,” “hillbillies,” “bigots,” and so forth. It is all because the “common folks” of the “Red States” in the South keep getting in the way of their evil agenda.

No mosques in Dixie, and no burqas either!

Now they’re coming for the…smileys?

From World’s Craziest Fatwas

The Evil Emoticons

The Fatwa: Multaqa Ahl al Hadeeth: Emoticon fatwa

I can almost get behind this one. Sure, they’re annoying, but evil? Really? Well, to a Muslim forum looking to make a name for itself—yes.

According to Muslim Internet Forum Multaqa Ahl al Hadeeth, “Emoticons are forbidden because of its imitation to Allah’s creatures whether it is original or mixture or even deformed one and since the picture is the face and the face is what makes the real picture then emoticons which represent faces that express emotions then all that add up to make them Haram.” Um…so should I hide away all of my child hood drawings while I’m at it? I sucked at art.

Additionally, “A woman should not use these images when speaking to a man who is not her mahram, because these faces are used to express how she is feeling, so it is as if she is smiling, laughing, acting shy and so on, and a woman should not do that with a non-mahram man. It is only permissible for a woman to speak to men in cases of necessity, so long as that is in a public chat room and not in private……Define ‘necessity’….hormones count? or a really big smiley face…

Verdict: How do they find the time to think about this crap? XOXOX XOXOX XOXOX

Many more here.

I don’t know whether this involved a formal fatwa, but still…

Pakistan: Taliban make bonfire of un-Islamic cloth in Wana

(h/t: Blazing Cat Fur)

July 26, 2011

PESHAWAR, Pakistan: A Taliban group in Pakistan on Tuesday burned a huge quantity of cloth taken from shopkeepers, saying it was too thin to be made into suitably modest garments, officials said.

The Islamist extremists stormed shops in Wana, the main town of the lawless South Waziristan tribal region, which borders Afghanistan, and made a bonfire of the cloth in a public area near the bazaar.

Shopkeeper Rahimullah Khan told AFP that at least eight armed men burst into his premises and took away bundles of raw cloth that they said was too thin to make respectable clothing.

“They said it was un-Islamic to wear clothes that don’t properly cover the human body,” Khan said.

More here.

By that logic, Pakistani Muslims of both sexes aren’t allowed to have cloth to make underclothes or sleepwear. They have to wear the same oppressively hot, heavy outerwear day and night, with no undergarments to absorb their sweat. Glad I don’t live there!

Originally posted on 2.0: The Blogmocracy

Tokyo’s Cat Cafes

TOKYO — I followed the instructions of the watchful cashier and took off my shoes, sanitized my hands, placed my bag in a locker and dangled an ID card (“customer #18”) from a lanyard around my neck. The cashier then gave me a once over and a shallow bow, and I padded quietly into the sitting room of the cafe.

“She’s the prettiest girl we have at our cafe. Everybody wants to touch her, but we ask that customers only do so if she doesn’t resist you,” a waitress told me.

She didn’t resist. And since I was paying for the privilege, I leaned in and stroked her cheek. She was as lovely as the waitress had promised: a big-eyed, silky soft, compliant 2-year-old Russian Blue cat.

I was at Calico, one of Tokyo’s increasingly popular cat cafes, where customers seeking human and feline companionship pay to sip tea and stroke one of the 20-odd resident cats, representing 17 different breeds…

Read the rest.

Cat Fancy: American Girl Meets Hello, Kitty

TOKYO, Japan — It’s like American Girl meets Hello, Kitty.

Cats in kimono. Cats dressed in red curls like Anne of Green Gables. Cats posing in Napoleon hats. Cats in tiaras. Cats in black lace.

Cat costumes created and sold by Takako Iwasa of Tokyo are creative, clever and catastrophically funny…

Read the rest.

Yes, the translation to English of the label is correct….wow.

Clothing label by a small US company. This shipment was headed for France.

Small business is alive and well in America!

Click [HERE] for the updated version of this article.

By Gramfan

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary Feminism is defined thus:

It was everywhere when it was first published in 1970.

It was virtually the next best thing that had happened to women since Emmeline Pankhurst and her Suffragettes worked to get women the vote. So we were told.

And certainly you cannot deny the benefits and progress that have come from these two women, and the many others who have taken over the baton and changed the lives of millions.

Many of today’s other famous feminists are living very comfortably on self-earned wealth: fine with me, it’s well-deserved.

They have turned their politics and activism into income sources by working in journalism and other media.

People listen to them.

They have power, enormous power.

Camille Paglia is but one of many whose opinions are highly respected, and it is easy to see why.

Germaine Greer is still going on strongly about all kinds of issues.

Gloria Steinem is another member of this esteemed crowd and there are also very many not-so-famous feminists.

These feminists are in almost all professions from politics to pianists, parents and yes, prostitutes – the oldest “profession” of them all!

Then of course there are the other women in the world who don’t occupy this rarified space but who have decided, and yes, it is a decison now, to become home-makers and mothers. Some of them decide to resume successful careers and some chose not to.

But I wonder if we all really received so many benefits from all these feminists? Some of us didn’t.

With all that is good and liberating in human progress there are often side effects and “unintended consequences”. Sadly there are goals that have not, and will not be achieved.

Certainly many of us get equal work for equal pay nowadays but not all of us. Then there are those who chose to be wives and mothers, who are often scorned, or looked down upon, for their choices.

They had jobs, but feminists weren’t satisfied; every other woman had to get one too. So they opened fire on homemakers with a savagery that still echoes throughout our culture. A housewife is a “parasite,” [Betty] Frieden writes; such women are “less than fully human” insofar as they “have never known a commitment to an idea.”

And….

Housewives, not men, were the prey in feminism’s sights when Kate Millett decreed in 1969 that the family must go. Feminists do not speak for traditional women. Men cannot know this, however, unless we tell them how we feel about them, our children, and our role in the home.

Men must understand that our feelings towards them and our children are derided by feminists and have earned us their enmity. Whether or not this understanding garners men’s support, traditional women must defend ourselves because the feminist offensive is, most essentially, a breach of solidarity with us, a disavowel of the obligation to honor the Women’s Pact [that religious celibates, professional women, and homemakers respect each other] that women in the movement owed to us (Source).

Oh yes, this site has more. Feminism today goes on and on, intellectualising and re-defining feminism to the extent where it is almost too difficult to follow, let alone comprehend.

Quite frankly I am more interested in the practical day-to-day realities. I take the two definitions at face value and I note it doesn’t specify any nationality,political allegiance or religion.

1. the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2. organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests

It is true a lot of this has happened in the West but rather than have Greer et al espouse “intellectual yada yada” I would rather see these women get militant again and do something to help their long-suffering sisters who live in Islamic countries, and who can but only dream of the lifestyle many of their famous feminist sisters enjoy.

All too often I see stories of honour killings, rape, female genital mutilation, subservience, domestic (and other) violence, forced marriage and utter discrimination perpetrated against women in Muslim countries and now also in the West.

Some women are getting hymenoplasties and buying repair kits before they marry.

Some are being recruited as homicide bombers.

One is punished for drinking beer, others face lashings or stonings.

An Australian Islamist tries to justify polygamy for everyone.

There are women who suffer terribly from acid attacks quite frequently.

Women in Gaza are not allowed to ride motorcycles, and Somali women are being scrutinised when wearing a bra!

Where’s Germaine when you need her, or would this make her happy I wonder?

And recently we have the on-going case of Rifka Bary who, as a minor, cannot chose her religion, and could become a victim of honorcide for apostasy. If she is sent back to her parents her fate is unknown. If she is allowed to remain alive the Islamists can deny honorcide even exists. This is happening in the USA now.

Yet in spite of these incidents feminists like Naomi Wolf manage to defend discrimination towards women in Islam and it then takes a compassionate feminist, Phyllis Chesler, who has actually lived in a Muslim country, to sort it out for her!

I know many feminists, and women in general, can be fearless fighters.

Code Pink, for example, have gone to Iraq and Afghanistan. True, they are an anti-war movement, but perhaps, just perhaps, they could have drawn some attention to the women who live and suffer in the war zones they are so adamantly against.

They could have easily added one more mission statement to what is on their website which mentions “social justice”.

Indeed, any other anti-war group could easily have done the same. I know they do not define themselves as feminists per se, but why not do more?

Could they not have met with Malalai Joya and offered some help?

Indeed, could not some of our famous feminists, female politicians and celebrities who spend so much time choking on their own venom over Sarah Palin have done the same? Are they afraid?

Or are they simply not interested in the women’s issues of today because they think it is another culture and therefore they shouldn’t interfere. They know it isn’t right but they can turn a blind eye to it, even as it happens under their noses, in their own countries.

It’s a cop-out.

The improvement of the condition of women in Islam is, to me, a far loftier goal than getting to wear trousers, getting equal pay, getting an abortion on demand, and having a man treat a woman more like a man! This was definitely an “unintended consequence” for me: trivial as it may seem.

I am much heartened by the fact that progress is being made, albeit in small steps.

Kuwati women in parliament refuse to wear the veil.

An Egyptian Cleric wants to ban burqas and other facial coverings.

Honor killing or honoricide is getting more attention.

Lubna Hussein got a lot of media attention over her sentence for wearing trousers.

Najwa Bin Laden and her son, Omar, wrote a book about their husband and father, Osama, and seem to be fearless about it. They have provided a fascinating insight into this man.

I think the real “feminist” heroines now are the ones who have literally put their lives on the line, not only for women in Islam but for the world in general.

Their goals and committment are what is truly deserving of our respect and support.

I am referring to women like Wafa Sultan, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Nonie Darwish, Supna Zaidi, Irshad Manji and women like them.

There is another one who would have possibly made it to this list: Neda Soltan.

Tragically she cannot, but in spirit she can inspire so much. I feel she deserves a mention among these brave, dedicated and fascinating women.

This is my challenge to todays feminists. Use your power again.

I am “just a Mom”. I do not have your platform and power.

This is indeed a most worthy cause to support and fight for.
With thanks to MuslimsAgainstSharia.

“Gramfan” has been blogging since 2002. She is “just a Mom” of two grown-up sons, and helps her husband of 38 years. She has occasionally written pieces for other ‘blogs, and posts comments. She now writes exclusively for Muslims Against Sharia.

Remember the Nancy Pelosi hijab flap?

Pelosi had no business going to Syria, undermining Bush Administration foreign policy, and giving an undeserved PR boost to Bashar Assad in the first place. She had to compound that error by wearing the symbol of a religion that she (supposedly) does not believe in, and by embracing a symbol for the oppression of women. But then, tasteless behavior and bad judgment is exactly what one would expect from a liberal Democrat, especially one from California. (See Syrian Reformists: The Damage from Pelosi’s Visit Will Be Felt for Years.)

Covering the cranium to cuddle up to CAIR

Bush officials don the hijab for the rededication ceremony of The Islamic Center in Washington June 27, 2007. They took some heat in the blogosphere for that. Here again, they had no business attending such a gathering at all.

Did Laura Bush get the take-home lesson?

Photo op: Touring the Middle East for breast cancer awareness

Laura Bush plans six-day tour of the Middle East; spokeswoman says she won’t wear abaya

Laura Bush departs Saturday on a six-day tour of the Middle East, with stops planned in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Jordan. The White House says the first lady plans to meet with government officials and leaders of medical and women’s groups during her overseas trip.

Given that the first lady wore a headscarf when she visited a Jewish holy site in Jerusalem and a mantilla when she met with Pope Benedict XVI, we asked if Bush will be wearing some sort of abaya while she’s in Saudi Arabia. “No,” Sally McDonough, the first lady’s spokeswoman, tells USA TODAY’s David Jackson, adding: “they do not expect nor encourage it” of Western visitors.

There’s nothing wrong with working for improved detection and cure of breast cancer, or any other type of cancer. I’m all for that, and you may recall that I have blogged about cancer both here and on the 1389 Message Blog. But some have questioned Laura Bush’s priorities in taking that quest to the Muslim world, where there are more severe and immediate threats to females’ health and survival. To put it bluntly, too many girls will not live long enough to be at much risk for a disease that mainly afflicts mature women.

But that’s not all: Laura Bush went back on her word about not wearing the abaya, as you can see from the photo above.

“So she’s wearing an abaya. Why does this matter?”

Why does breast cancer goes untreated in the Middle East?

See Breast cancer often untreated in Mideast, Lifting the Veil From A Deadly Disease, and Cancer in Saudi Arabia.

Evidently, Laura Bush donned the abaya because it was a gift and she felt that it would be appropriate to be photographed in it. Unfortunately, this was a setup that sends exactly the wrong message, on so many levels!

In a nutshell, when women are veiled and kept in seclusion according to Islamic principles, how likely are they to go out and get proper medical care, which would include screening for, and treatment of, breast cancer? In Saudi Arabia, women still aren’t allowed to drive. Many Muslim women are unwilling to be examined by male doctors. Girls are too often discouraged from becoming educated in medicine or anything else.

And don’t forget that the country that is responsible for the bulk of the advances in medical treatment in the Middle East is, of course, Israel. But Israeli physicians are not welcome in the Muslim Middle East.

Poor Longevity for Saudi Women

Stein hoist to mean Gene on LGF for the above link and for these statistics:

I often use the CIA World Fact Book’s stats about demographics.

In regards the “kingdom,” the stats show an incredible drop off in women after age 15….

0-14 years:
male 5,369,285
female 5,162,585

15-64 years:
male 9,316,694
female 7,089,370

What does this picture reveal?

In this picture, Laura herself is unveiled, but she is seated between two veiled breast cancer survivors. If women like these were free to seek whatever medical care they needed, without the necessity of wearing veils, of finding a male relative to drive them, and finding a female doctor to examine them, wouldn’t their chances of early detection and remission be far better?

It’s about CANCER, not photo ops and protocol!

By wearing an abaya to meet with dignitaries, Laura Bush is promoting the anti-woman Islamic ideology that is causing the problem in the first place!

Updated 10/27/07:
Accepting such “gifts” means accepting Islamization!

Hanging Tough in Oklahoma

The handlers for the Bush entourage should have made it clear, before the trip, that gifts of an Islamic nature should not be given and cannot be accepted. The Saudis don’t even allow Christian or Jewish items into the Tragic Kingdom at all!

Update (10/28/07): Laura Bush missed a great opportunity to keep quiet

LGF: Laura Bush Defends Saudi Misogyny

“They do not see covering as some sort of subjugation of women:” Laura Bush defends the hijab.

Note: wearing the abaya in Saudi Arabia is not a “choice.” It’s mandatory for all women when they are in public. If they show even a little bit of ankle, they’re subject to being beaten and arrested by the Saudi religious police (mutaween).

Does Laura Bush really think those women will be honest about their opinions on this misogynistic practice?

Republican Riot: The Ghost of Ramadan Future

More bizarre pix!

Updated 1/1/08:

GOV: Burqas are Bad for Your Health

Lack of sunlight is unhealthy for women, unborn babies, and nursing infants.

How many find the below picture a bit “Pointless”? Repressive?

Technorati : Bush, Islam, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, breast cancer, cancer, enemy propaganda, health, political correctness, women
Del.icio.us : Bush, Islam, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, breast cancer, cancer, enemy propaganda, health, political correctness, women
Ice Rocket : Bush, Islam, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria, breast cancer, cancer, enemy propaganda, health, political correctness, women

Powered by Zoundry

Now it’s possible to apply germ-killing nanoparticles to textiles. It could have some valuable medical uses. But when clothing with this technology becomes commercially available at an affordable price, it will eliminate one more reason to take an unwanted break from the “intertubes”!

Technorati tags:
clothing
innovations
Internet addicts
microbes
nanotechnology
the human condition