mead berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Islam and Europe
The NYT’s Veil Fail
Features Icon
show comments
  • JR

    NYT accusing people of bigotry is news? I thought it was just a day ending in a Y. Does anyone take them seriously anymore?

    • Fat_Man

      The country’s leading source of fake news.

  • vb

    European police and intelligence agencies have been monitoring Muslim enclaves and immigrant groups very carefully. This decision may have been a response to pressures being exerted by radicals on other Muslims within these groups. The French banning of headscarves in schools was a response to seeing schoolgirls without scarves threatened and attacked by Muslims guys on their way to and from school. We are dealing with strong-man cultures, and there is probably nothing that makes unassimilated young men feel strong that subjugating women.

  • (((kingschitz)))

    The NYT engages once again in an act of American cultural hegemony. Our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, and our judicial decisions are one size fits all for the world—unless that be the Muslim world.

    A variant of this arrogance has been on display every time we go nation building. Give it up, already.

    • Fat_Man

      The NYTimes would claim that any attempt to impose constitutional values on Cuba or Venezuela is imperialism.

      • (((kingschitz)))

        And the NYT would be correct. How far are we willing to go? We lost over 58,300 KIA in Vietnam, some 5,000 in Iraq and 2,500 in Afghanistan. At some point, it’s just not worth bailing water for others.

        I’m old enough to remember when the NYT backed JFK and early LBJ—the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, no less—in Vietnam. And how, albeit reluctantly, it sided with those Senate Dems backing Bush-43’s use of force resolution.

        The point is that, elites having abandoned military service since the ’60s, dying for Democan neoliberalism is a price that many working class people no longer wish to pay.

        • Fat_Man

          Things that are in our space are different than things that are on the other side of the planet.

        • Jim__L

          … And we lost hundreds of thousands in the two world wars — the first of which we could well have stayed out of, but the second of which we could not.

          There are points where it’s worth bailing out democracies. The wisdom to know the difference is the point we should be praying for, here.

  • Disappeared4x

    The niqab or burka would be inconsistent with Germany’s public nudity laws, especially on the nude hiking trails, or nudism allowed parks in Munich. Photos too easily available…
    [Freikörperkultur (FKK) is a German movement whose name translates to Free Body Culture]

    • vb

      No one in Germany forces you to go around nude. If you want to wear clothes in public, you can. In fact, most people do. The FKK areas are limited in number and easy to avoid. I think that FKK is a throwback to the days of the Weimar Reublic. I know one person who goes to a nude beach. She was sent to a Waldorf school back in the days when they didn’t teach math.
      This has nothing to do with covering your face in a bank or when you go through security checkpoints.

  • Observe&Report

    Islam is a cancer in the West, whose growth and metastasisation is aided and abetted by a sanctimonious, left-wing intelligentsia peddling multiculturalism and diversity to gird their own power and sense of righteousness. The NYT is merely a mouthpiece for this poisonous agenda.

    • Fat_Man

      Islam is also a cancer in its homeland where it produces nothing but ignorance, poverty, tyranny, and unending war.

  • Fat_Man

    “In France in 2015, acts of violence and discrimination against Muslims were triple those of the previous year.”

    Enough with the moral equivalency. In France the Bataclan and Charlie Hebdo attacks resulted in the deaths of hundreds of innocent people. Saying snippy things about creatures hidden from public view is not the equivalent of massacring human beings.

  • FriendlyGoat

    The only argument which is going to work against face covering in freedom-of-religion countries is a security argument. It’s in everyone’s interest to treat this as not a religious matter but as something more like our response to the recent creepy clowns. No. Just no.

    • CapitalHawk

      Yes, there is a security argument. A corollary is the ability to identify a person. If you can’t see a person’s face, how do you positively ID them?

      • FriendlyGoat

        Exactly. And this argument does not get off in the weeds of “but covering my face is a religious duty, religious right”, etc.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service