I just wonder if people realise the strength of the muslim community. Breaking away from it is not easy even in this country. We have special shelters for girls wanting to leave islam. They are threatened by their family and often end up moving to another part of the country to start a new life.
In 2007 was the first one opened in Friesland:

The first shelter for 'honor' crime victims is opening Sunday in Friesland: young women who are on the run from the revenge of family members. According to social workers such a shelter is very needed.

Last year more than 200 victims were received, mostly in women's shelters. But they are not organized for this group of especially Turkish and Moroccan girls, that need extra protection.

The location of the special 'honor crime' shelter is being held secret for security reasons. The goal is that such shelters will also open in other parts of the Netherlands.

http://islamineurope.blogspot.nl/2007/04/friesland-first-shelter-for-honor-crime.html

Peter Brown wrote:
how the hell can anybody here plead for the toleration of Islam totally eludes me

Just as it totally eludes me how you can think of over a billion people as a single monolithic entity that thinks as one
You sound exactly like a member of the English Defence League who knows not the first thing about Islam and has no
intention of understanding it either. When wallowing in the comfort zone of ignorance is so much easier to do instead

So there are nice pink fluffy muslims.

Peter Brown wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:Islam violates civil liberties!

absolutely

I'm not the type to go crying but if I were then ex Muslims like this in the radio show would have the tears flowing

It's odd isn't it? Twitter SJWs can kick up a real stink about First World problems such as alleged "sexist tropes in video games". But if ever there's an Islamic context, actual oppressed women, persecuted gays, and apostates, might scratch their heads and wonder how it is that those very same moral champions can be so sullen and equivocal about addressing their real plight. If only the persecutors were exclusively non-Muslim "white dudes!"

My advice to any "white dude" who's genuinely misogynistic, homophobic, and sick of internet SJWs getting on his case? Say you've converted to Islam and that your repellent beliefs are mandated in Islamic scripture. Although you'll remain a "white dude", not to mention a thoroughly unpleasant example of homo sapiens sapiens, you can bet a good number of your critics will slink away, never to bother you again. Because now criticising your odious beliefs could be seen as criticising Islam by extension. And who wants to run the risk of being dubbed Islamophobic, and thus "racist"?

Some mighty big steps being taken there Matt.

Peter Brown wrote:The Burka is a message to you, it says I hate you, I want you dead I want Islam and Allah to dominate everything humans do, and we must follow every act Muhammad did. If you don't understand this simple message then you are as stupid as they are.

No it isn't. You are making a sweeping generalization.

Just google acid thrown in face you are bound to find examples in the news of it happening in Islamic state around the globe. Islam is based on making you afraid, to live in terror of Allah, to keep everyone else in fear, to submit and conform.

The actions of extremist fundamentalists. Your point?

In Europe we had the Saudis pump trillions of dollars to promote Wahhabism and we saw many go join ISIS!!!

Exact numbers are not known, but it is thought that more than $100 billion have been spent on exporting fanatical Wahhabism to various much poorer Muslim nations worldwide over the past three decades. It might well be twice that number. By comparison, the Soviets spent about $7 billion spreading communism worldwide in the 70 years from 1921 and 1991. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf ... 01916.html
.

A) Adjust that $7 Billion for inflation, B) Your point has no relevance aside from your fear-mongering.

America I expect never had that sort of money spent over there so you'll have less home grown Islamists, but you still have 9 / 11 to remind you, they don't like you one little bit, they want you dead!!!

No they don't. Some extreme fundamentalists do (but a good portion of that is also in relation to the fact that we have been occupying Afghanistan for over a decade now).

I hate the Tory party as well, so make a word like Toryphobe to ignore the death cult coming for you

No you are irrationally characterizing the entire Muslim population as being evil simply because you hate Islam. Which is made abundantly clear when you make an ass-ignorant statement like this:

Peter Brown wrote:and don't bring Muslims into this because 145 Muslims children who were not Muslim enough were murdered by Islamists! Islam is the evil, and the Qur'an the rule book they follow, and the Arab bandit Muhammad who also killed captured children, the man who's example they do follow. You will not find anything ISIS does not discribed as an action performed by Muhammad during his lifetime, they really do follow Islam....literally.

Extremists and fundamentalists do not constitute the entirety of Muslims. Your sweeping generalization and fearmongering are just more examples of your bigotry.

Scot Dutchy wrote:
So there are nice pink fluffy muslims

Yes Scot all of them are because that is exactly what I said they were

Try to read the words I actually posted and not the ones in your head

surreptitious57 wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:
So there are nice pink fluffy muslims

Yes Scot all of them are because that is exactly what I said they were

Try to read the words I actually posted and not the ones in your head

That word salad? I like reality better.

O the irony of you claiming to know what reality is when you are
incapable of displaying nothing but tunnel vision on a subject you
do not know quite as much about as you actually think that you do

The_Metatron wrote:With such a ban, in the Netherlands, people may not make half of their population appear in public as non-persons, as property.

Despite the fact that before the ban people (by which you mean Muslims) could not make half of "their" population appear in public as non-persons, as property without a veil either. Name a means by which one Muslim could force another to wear a veil and you will be naming an act already prohibited by law before the veil ban went into force.

The only thing this law affects is women choosing to wear the veil. If the men in her life were abusive before the law was passed, they'll still be just as abusive now.

Not that I don't agree that there is a public interest in establishing the identity of a person engaged in public action. I largely agree with the way this law has been enacted (wear the veil if you like, just don't expect to have any interaction with a business or government department without revealing your identity). But please don't pretend that it will stop abusive sexist degenerates who formerly used force and threats to control the women in their lives from currently using force and threats to control the women in their lives.

I understand that you see the veil as a dehumanising garment. Please try and understand that many of the women who wear it do not.

Matthew Shute wrote:

Peter Brown wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:Islam violates civil liberties!

absolutely

I'm not the type to go crying but if I were then ex Muslims like this in the radio show would have the tears flowing

It's odd isn't it? Twitter SJWs can kick up a real stink about First World problems such as alleged "sexist tropes in video games". But if ever there's an Islamic context, actual oppressed women, persecuted gays, and apostates, might scratch their heads and wonder how it is that those very same moral champions can be so sullen and equivocal about addressing their real plight. If only the persecutors were exclusively non-Muslim "white dudes!"

My advice to any "white dude" who's genuinely misogynistic, homophobic, and sick of internet SJWs getting on his case? Say you've converted to Islam and that your repellent beliefs are mandated in Islamic scripture. Although you'll remain a "white dude", not to mention a thoroughly unpleasant example of homo sapiens sapiens, you can bet a good number of your critics will slink away, never to bother you again. Because now criticising your odious beliefs could be seen as criticising Islam by extension. And who wants to run the risk of being dubbed Islamophobic, and thus "racist"?

Except not. You can criticize the wearing of head veils all you want without being islamophobic. It is when you support a law that bans head veils for no other reason than I hate islam than it becomes not only misogynistic but islamophobic.

surreptitious57 wrote:O the irony of you claiming to know what reality is when you are
incapable of displaying nothing but tunnel vision on a subject you
do not know quite as much about as you actually think that you do

You do I take it. You know what you can do and go and read some real islamic sites.

Not the fuzzy, wuzzy, fluffy ones.

Scot Dutchy wrote:

surreptitious57 wrote:O the irony of you claiming to know what reality is when you are
incapable of displaying nothing but tunnel vision on a subject you
do not know quite as much about as you actually think that you do

You do I take it. You know what you can do and go and read some real islamic sites.

Not the fuzzy, wuzzy, fluffy ones.

Mighty presumptuous of you to dictate to everyone what real Islam is. Have any evidence to back your claims up?

willhud9 wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

surreptitious57 wrote:O the irony of you claiming to know what reality is when you are
incapable of displaying nothing but tunnel vision on a subject you
do not know quite as much about as you actually think that you do

You do I take it. You know what you can do and go and read some real islamic sites.

Not the fuzzy, wuzzy, fluffy ones.

Mighty presumptuous of you to dictate to everyone what real Islam is. Have any evidence to back your claims up?

Back what up? Read Will.

willhud9 wrote:Except not. You can criticize the wearing of head veils all you want without being islamophobic. It is when you support a law that bans head veils for no other reason than I hate islam than it becomes not only misogynistic but islamophobic.

If you read my earlier post, you'll notice that I don't support a general ban at all.

Netherlands: Half of honor-violence victims also sexually abused

Netherlands: Half of honor-violence victims also sexually abused

Honor-related crime victims are sexually abused more often than previously thought. That is one of the most remarkable conclusions of a study by the social services organization Fier Fryslân.

Of the 89 women who turned to Fier Fryslân between January 2008 and March 2010, 45 were sexually abused by family members, sometimes by several people.

Fier Fryslân, which is running an an honor-crime shelter pilot for the Justice Ministry and the VWS, published the results in a publication named "Daughters of Zahir". Zahir is the name of the shelter for victims of honor-related violence. The book will be presented Tuesday.
http://islamineurope.blogspot.nl/2010/10/netherlands-half-of-honor-violence.html

Nice healthy muslim families.

Nicko wrote:... I largely agree with the way this law has been enacted (wear the veil if you like, just don't expect to have any interaction with a business or government department without revealing your identity). But please don't pretend that it will stop abusive sexist degenerates who formerly used force and threats to control the women in their lives from currently using force and threats to control the women in their lives.. ..

I know women who suffer verbal and even physical abuse from strangers in the street because they don't wear niqab. It would seem fair to assume that such abuse goes on much more commonly behind closed doors, too.

These restrictions will stop these instances of abuse by going some way towards normalising 'not wearing niqab', by providing good reasons to refuse to wear it beyond being an immodest harami. What well-meaning SJWs don't appreciate is that we have places where such normalisation is now necessary - but they don't have any in france, and now they won't have any in NL either.

These laws work, and I've yet to see a compelling argument against the NL law whereby people can still parade around as billboards for devout segregation and misogyny in the street if they insist, but they cannot walk into a school or metro station without being identifiable to those around them.

Matthew Shute wrote:

willhud9 wrote:Except not. You can criticize the wearing of head veils all you want without being islamophobic. It is when you support a law that bans head veils for no other reason than I hate islam than it becomes not only misogynistic but islamophobic.

If you read my earlier post, you'll notice that I don't support a general ban at all.

Nice try Will. Read the proposed law will you. It is for ALL face coverings.

Matthew Shute wrote:

willhud9 wrote:Except not. You can criticize the wearing of head veils all you want without being islamophobic. It is when you support a law that bans head veils for no other reason than I hate islam than it becomes not only misogynistic but islamophobic.

If you read my earlier post, you'll notice that I don't support a general ban at all.

I was using you in the general pluralistic sense. I know you are not for a ban. Apologies for the confusion.

Also Will it is not a general ban.