11 Comments »

1. At last a politician who speaks out about the veil. I write as a woman NOT a racist. Integration wont happen while this way of dress continues in modern Britain- it is often threatening and always speaks segregation. My only wish is that others join Mr Straw to support him and that the Muslim voice /threat to votes does NOT let this go away without resolution

   Comment by diane brown — 6 Oct 2006 on 11:20 am | Link

2. I am a Muslim and I congratulate your courrage to take up this humaniterian issue. I can tell you that veil is NOT an Islamic order. There is nothing like that in Quran (words of God revealed through Gebriel to prophet Mahomed), nor in Hadees (book of sayings of the prophet). This tradition did not exist during the life time of the prophet.
   There are Islamic laws in Pakistan. The law of evidence says that a woman must remove her veil when appearing before a magistrate or a judge!
   A survey conducted in Karachi in 1950 with the help of mobile X-ray unit revealed that 25% of women in veil suffered from TB.
   Carry on; God is with you. = A. Sultan, Stockport. 6/10/06

   Comment by Abdul Sultan — 6 Oct 2006 on 1:21 pm | Link

3. To The Rt Hon Jack Straw MP

   Congratulations on opening this much needed debate, you certainly have my support.

   Best of luck
   regards
   Lloyd Hughes

   Comment by Captain Lloyd Hughes — 6 Oct 2006 on 4:21 pm | Link

4. Congratulations to Jack Straw for saying what the British public have been saying for years. As a ex soldier who served in the Middle East we were forbidden to smoke outside the camp as this would offend the Muslim population. So why oh why do we, here in our own land of England, have to put up with all the traditions and dress codes of people who came to us on a "please let me live here" basis? If they can not conform to our lifestyle dont let them in in the first place. This country is seen as too soft for our own good,and enough is enough. Well done Jack, for a minor,but important stand. I would not talk to anyone who,s face I could not see!

   Comment by Ted Kenyon — 6 Oct 2006 on 5:32 pm | Link

5. My congratulations and support to Jack Straw regarding the use of a Muslim Veil. It is correct that when you have a conversation with someone wearing sunglasses they should remove them as a simple matter of basic manners \x96 you cannot relate correctly to someone without seeing their eyes. As a nation we seem increasingly to be pussy-footing around the over-sensitive feelings of Muslim peoples that have elected by their own free will to live here \x96 and this should be either under or with respect of our British laws and traditions. Too often we are in a situation where we are being accused of being racialist or anti-Muslim when we are simply expressing our personal opinions under the right of free speech.

   Comment by Derek Summers — 6 Oct 2006 on 6:45 pm | Link

6. Well done Mr Straw, I find it intimidating and somewhat offensive to see women veiled and hiding from public view. Why do they?
   As the gentleman said in a previous comment it is not written in their religion. It is time someone stood up and spoke for the majority and not the minority.
   I work at a large London Airport and we must assume all that wear the Yashmak are actually female.
   Lets get common sense back, we do not wish to oppress but we do not also want to be oppressed.

   Bev Pook

   Comment by Bev Pook — 6 Oct 2006 on 11:36 pm | Link

7. Well done Mr Straw, I find it intimidating and somewhat offensive to see women veiled and hiding from public view. Why do they?
   As the gentleman said in a previous comment it is not written in their religion. It is time someone stood up and spoke for the majority and not the minority.
   I work at a large London Airport and we must assume all that wear the Yashmak are actually female.
   Lets get common sense back, we do not wish to oppress but we do not also want to be oppressed.

   Bev Pook

   Comment by Bev Pook — 6 Oct 2006 on 11:37 pm | Link

8. Well done Mr Straw, I find it intimidating and somewhat offensive to see women veiled and hiding from public view. Why do they?
   As the gentleman said in a previous comment it is not written in their religion. It is time someone stood up and spoke for the majority and not the minority.
   I work at a large London Airport and we must assume all that wear the Yashmak are actually female.
   Lets get common sense back, we do not wish to oppress but we do not also want to be oppressed.

   Bev Pook

   Comment by Bev Pook — 6 Oct 2006 on 11:38 pm | Link

9. #My email to our PM tonight ….
   Dear PM’s Team,
   Having watched "tonight" on tv with the inimitable Trevor McDonald, may I add my views that, like it or not, this is still after all England and not some middle eastern country.
   Whatever happened to "when in Rome" … etc. It’s high time the meddling, attention seeking "do gooders" and "pc" brigade were kicked into touch.
   Veils or, to be more accurate MASKS, (veils being transparent), are first intimidating, secondly have the ability to hide male or female with or without weapons from identification; good lord Bin Laden could safely walk our streets in this guise with a weapon and who would ever know, and this at a time when we are all being told ID cards are inevitable. These masks are not required according to their holy book and, cultural decisions are not set in concrete. It is my honest opinion that, those insisting upon wearing these items are simply attention seekers and not as they claim, just modest. Get real, in England which draws more attention, an open face among thousands or, a dark (usually) mask.
   I for one shall excercise my democratic right not to aknowledge those wearing such masks. *Which is not to say the terrorist possibilities will not continue to concern me, it will.
   Well said Jack Straw sir, you speak for many thousands.
   Yours most sincerely, Michael Stanley-Brown.

   Comment by M.Stanley-Brown. — 16 Oct 2006 on 9:30 pm | Link

10. #My email to our PM tonight ….
    Dear PM’s Team,
    Having watched "tonight" on tv with the inimitable Trevor McDonald, may I add my views that, like it or not, this is still after all England and not some middle eastern country.
    Whatever happened to "when in Rome" … etc. It’s high time the meddling, attention seeking "do gooders" and "pc" brigade were kicked into touch.
    Veils or, to be more accurate MASKS, (veils being transparent), are first intimidating, secondly have the ability to hide male or female with or without weapons from identification; good lord Bin Laden could safely walk our streets in this guise with a weapon and who would ever know, and this at a time when we are all being told ID cards are inevitable. These masks are not required according to their holy book and, cultural decisions are not set in concrete. It is my honest opinion that, those insisting upon wearing these items are simply attention seekers and not as they claim, just modest. Get real, in England which draws more attention, an open face among thousands or, a dark (usually) mask.
    I for one shall excercise my democratic right not to aknowledge those wearing such masks. *Which is not to say the terrorist possibilities will not continue to concern me, it will.
    Well said Jack Straw sir, you speak for many thousands.
    Yours most sincerely, Michael Stanley-Brown.

    Comment by M.Stanley-Brown. — 16 Oct 2006 on 9:31 pm | Link

11. http://www.english.ccsu.edu/hegglund/206/rushdie_empire.htm
    It is a great pity Jack Straw did not read this article before supporting Salman Rushdie.
    ‘The new empire within Britain 1982’ made it impossible for anyone to object to anything else Rushdie wrote ever after. It was taken as holy writ by the wanabee intelligentsia.

    Thus Rushdie felt invincible and went on to engender trouble across the globe. Now the long suffering British public, kept in ignorance of this article, inherits the whirlwind.

    Comment by Mary Saunders — 22 Jun 2007 on 10:33 am | Link

---

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.