=>”I think you’ll find that racial physical types are based on skeletal differences, not skin colours.”

I agree completely. However, I tried to make the same point a few times on Sepia Mutiny (the American version of PP) and got lynched by some of the commenters there. Some Asians over there are very, very touchy indeed about all this and go completely berserk. It appears to be something specific to North American culture to automatically assume that “race” = skin colour, even though common sense and a decent understanding of biology indicates otherwise.

(This is not to say there isn’t sometimes a considerable overlap between skeletal factors/facial features and skin colour, but personally I’ve always regarded the former to be the main identifier, not the latter).

=>” people from the sub-continent are indeed Caucasian.”

Hmm. Not all of them. It’s a convoluted (and very controversial) issue, but the majority of people back in the subcontinent appear to be a combination of various ethnicities. The average Asian in the UK — which is dominated by individuals whose ancestry lies in the northwestern belt, from Kashmir down to Gujarat, on both sides of the border — isn’t representative of what the average Indian looks like back in India. However, I would say that many of the stereotypical “northie” types are Caucasian to some degree, albeit much closer to certain sections of the Middle-Eastern variety rather than Europeans (especially Northern & Western Europeans).

Arab is a cultural, historical and linguistic grouping which has nothing to do with skin color. Being white has everything to do with skin color. Those Arabs in the Sudan arent white. Or would you call them Arabized blacks similar to the Arabized berbers of north Africa? In any event, yo momma.

“When a musilm women wears the veiI she may do for many reasons, but she knows its association with political Islam and is aligning herself with it however much she protest to the latter.”

Wrong Stupid!

“Despite whatever “reasons” a Muslim women chooses to wear the veil, she activitly chooses to stand next to policital Islam, if that women wanted to distance herself from policital Islam, she would not wear it.”

Wrong Stupid. Now I know that I have to accept that you understand the native better than he understands himself but in this instance you are wrong. Any woman who wears a veils is associating herself with the wives of Prophet Muhammed as Muslim women were commanded to imitate them, to love thier example and the example of thier husband. You may associate their act with politics but you are no more correct about your opinion than I am. (Though for the record I am correct and you just a doofus.)

Now you go to a Muslim woman wo wears a veil and ask her why she does it. If she is correct in her belief system she will produce the proofs from the Quran and the hadiths for her reasons, along with her reasons for doing else she calls Islamic. Hopefully she will not respond that she does it to give whitey the finger because Aisha, Zainad, and the rest didnt do it to provoke whitey.

Ok so when you argue that it is done for politics then you too are arguing that it is a choice which in this crazy ass liberal society she has the right to make such choices.

Youre stupid.

Although I share the security concerns of providing a network that terrorists can travel the country undetected like Micheal Jackson does in Bahrain, or OBL in Pakastain, or Jornalists in pre war Afganistan, I don’t support banning it as it is a sympton of Political not the cause. You might as well pass laws banning the night.

Despite whatever “reasons” a Muslim women chooses to wear the veil, she activitly chooses to stand next to policital Islam, if that women wanted to distance herself from policital Islam, she would not wear it.

Its not that complicated.

terryfitz states it very well in post #7, personally I call the “reasons” to wear it “excuses”, or to quote Rushie “the veil sucks”.

My “resounding ignorance” may upset you, but in return your lack of clarity and your weak attempts at moral equilvance on this issue upsets me.

The veil debate is not complicated, or interesting. It is like focusing on a persons rash when they have liver failure. We should be focus on the liver failure and the rash will clear itself up.

TFI

I recommend that before you weigh in about the “excuses” women give you do a bit of background research into why women wear the veil in the first place. Your words betray a resounding ignorance which isn’t rendered forgivable by the fact that it’s also quite common.

Because no women wearing the veil in this country is unaware of the message wearing it sends out.

Political Islamists have yet to slaughter millions of innocent people, give them time.

TFI

I thought the point of the niqab was not to bring a certain kind of attention on yourself, i.e., the lusty male gaze, rather than any attention whatsoever, in which case there would be a fashion for camoflage niqabs.

Another point…
The wearer of the niqab is saying that she is separate from the mainstream of society in this country and has to wear it because she is a victim of prejudice from white people.

This notion that it’s a means of separating yourself off from mainstream white society is a little suspect. I mean it’s not as if niqabs are worn only for the benefit of white people, they’re worn in sight of, excluding close family relations, ALL MEN, not just white men, but Muslim men too! It may be a symbol of separation for some white Brits (and some Brown Brits, and Muslims too), but it could equally be seen as a symbol of devotion to God, so maybe it would be helpful if we as a culture were more aware of women’s reasons for donning it, rather than vicously condemning it based on prejudices.

As for TFI’s comparison of the swastika with the veil? A little absurd no? I can’t recall political Islamists having slaughtered millions of innocent people.

Anyway, I’m always nice.

So be nice.

My point is that white racism against non-White minorities is still hugely disproportionate and so should still be the overwhelming focus of any analysis of racism in this country. Usually when people talk about the increasing level of racism against Whites, they usually ignore the fact that the figures still reveal an immense disparity in racial attacks and discrimination, seemingly implying that the ethnic majority’s racism is far more acceptable than any other type.

Also, it seems to me that the White majority has been let off the hook recently: the focus is ALL on Muslims and their reluctance to integrate. Which is understandable given that asking uncomfortable questions about the majority of the population and their prejudices is not exactly a vote grabber.

To quote Mike Marqusee:

Despite the statistical reality that ethnic minorities are on the receiving end of abuse and discrimination from their fellow citizens and the State, they are blamed for a failure to integrate. Facts on the ground, however, do not bear out the self-segregation thesis. According to the latest census, the indices of residential segregation for all ethnic minority groups fell between 1991 and 2001. The index of isolation — measuring how likely people are not to know people from other groups — is highest for white Christians, followed by white people with no religion. According to CRE studies, 95 per cent of white Britons do not have a Black or Asian friend and one in four would not want to live near them; in contrast, 60 per cent of Muslims have non-Muslim friends.

I’ve made this point before. Given the demographics of this country, white people making up the vast majority of the population, the fact that only “half of victims are white” means that you are far, far more likely to be a victim of a racial murder if you’re from an ethnic minority. The vastly increased probabilty of being subjected to racial assault and murder is something we non-whites have had to put up with for ages. So what is the point in bringing up that statistic?

=>”So long as you arent Muslim you have some hostility towards Islam simply because of your rejection of it.”

That’s not necessarily true. It is entirely feasible for people to be neutral about Islam. Some people will not know enough about Islam to make an informed decision about their feelings towards the faith either way (hostility or otherwise), others will simply be not interested as they will be preoccupied with other matters in their lives.

Love and Hate are not the only emotions — there is a huge area of neutrality in-between.

Same analogy applies here.

Agreed. Phillips is a friend of Blair and a Neo Labourite.

Blair and New Labour have catergorically lost the Iraq war. They regard the Muslim loyalty vote to Labour as lost for good. And they are using anti-Muslim sentiment to obscure their own massive crimes against humanity in Iraq. Where people should be looking to impeach Blair in this international debacle, they are instead being lead by the equivalent of a newspaper lynch mob to hang the nearest niqabi from a TV boom.

Bang on the money.

When a musilm women wears the veiI she may do for many reasons, but she knows its association with political Islam and is aligning herself with it however much she protest to the latter.

As for this trevor bloke, his predictions of riots sound a little like Enoch Powels warnings all those years ago, “there will be blood on the streets” I don’t either should be given to much creedence.

I also think that Bikhair is the perfect example as to why “Muslim” feelings shouldn’t be respected by default..

TFI

Please dont use that word infidel to me. I am not a christian and you are a kafir as far as I am concerned. There is no concept of fidelity in Islam.

Blair and New Labour have catergorically lost the Iraq war. They regard the Muslim loyalty vote to Labour as lost for good. And they are using anti-Muslim sentiment to obscure their own massive crimes against humanity in Iraq. Where people should be looking to impeach Blair in this international debacle, they are instead being lead by the equivalent of a newspaper lynch mob to hang the nearest niqabi from a TV boom. And as Osborne observes:

“Rather than try to win them back, Labour has cut its losses, and decided instead to stir up racial tension as a means of appealing directly to the white working-class vote. Labour activists tell me Jack Straw’s remarks have proved ‘incredibly resonant’ on the doorstep.”

Even as low the depths are, the SWP will go in order to gain support, equally bad is New Labour’s cynical indifference to Muslims on the street as they play to the gallery and incite anti-Muslim hatred.

Hand on my heart, I think Muslims would do well to switch their vote to the Conservatives. That would be the most powerful force Muslims can use to protect themselves from this New Labour tactic and give a roundhouse thwack to Blair’s head at the same time. Political ideologies have no value whatsoever, just use your vote.

Come on you Muslims, get with it.