American Muslims fear a new wave of Islamophobia

[Birchbark22]

Now Prime Minister Harper is nattering on about how he believes that there should be a law in place prohibiting federal public servants from wearing a niqab while working and also for people who are receiving services from the federal government. When does the government get to dictate what citizens can wear while recieving services that people pay taxes for?

This man is not to be trusted and is appealing to xenophobia in hopes of being re-elected.

 

[chijohnaok]

Now Prime Minister Harper is nattering on about how he believes that there should be a law in place prohibiting federal public servants from wearing a niqab while working and also for people who are receiving services from the federal government. When does the government get to dictate what citizens can wear while recieving services that people pay taxes for?

This man is not to be trusted and is appealing to xenophobia in hopes of being re-elected.

I don't know what Harper's reasoning is for this but I could offer a possible theory:



Could it have anything to do with security concerns for people passing through checkpoints?

I've worked for private companies where you have to swipe or present an ID when entering the building.

I've gone into state government buildings where you need to pass through security checkpoints in order to enter.

Could it at all be a concern with security officials not being able to compare the photo ID (which contain a facial photo) with the bearer's face in order to validate that they are who they say they are?

 

[Flying Pig]

I don't think we're yet at the stage where every public building has to have security tests on everyone who goes in - I don't particularly want to go through a metal detector whenever I go to the GP.

 

[chijohnaok]

I don't think we're yet at the stage where every public building has to have security tests on everyone who goes in - I don't particularly want to go through a metal detector whenever I go to the GP.

I can't speak for other countries (or even other states within the USA) but having lived in both Florida and Illinois, I can say that many public buildings in Illinois and Florida do have security checkpoints of some sort before you can enter (very far) into the building.

Court houses:
Illinois--photo IDs (this was back in the 1990s).
Florida--photo IDs, passing through a metal detector and having any bags/briefcases/backpacks separately scanned (this is current process).

State or county office buildings:
Illinois (back in the 1990s): checkpoints with guards checking photo IDs
Florida (Hillsborough County): checkpoints with guards checking photo IDs. (some also have metal detecctors).
Employees passing through those entrances generally have to swipe a photo ID on a scanner.

In Florida (Hillsborough County) at the Department of Motor Vehicles offices you need to present a photo ID and documentation showing the purpose of your visit (Drivers license renewal, ID application request, etc) in order to get much further than the main entrance to the building.

Post offices:
Generally no sort of security checkpoints for those entering the public areas/lobbies.
I guess you don't have people going postal in post offices.

 

[Formaldehyde]

As far as I know, there are no "DMV" offices in Florida anymore. It is all handled by the county clerks. And there is no requirement to "present a photo ID and documentation showing the purpose of your visit". (Ironically that is where you have to go to get a photo ID.) You simply walk in and tell the clerk what you are there for. You don't show them anything. Or just hang out if you wish. There are plenty of chairs and free AC.

I also don't think there is any security precautions at other county office buildings. But I couldn't say for certain because I have never visited one before.

It should be quite obvious why courthouses have additional security, as well as federal buildings that may be subject to acts of terrorism by some far-right extremist, such as what occurred in Oklahoma City.

 

[chijohnaok]

As far as I know, there are no "DMV" offices in Florida anymore. It is all handled by the county clerks. And there is no requirement to "present a photo ID and documentation showing the purpose of your visit". (Ironically that is where you have to go to get a photo ID.) You simply walk in and tell the clerk what you are there for. You don't show them anything. Or just hang out if you wish. There are plenty of chairs and free AC.

I also don't think there is any security precautions at other county office buildings. But I couldn't say for certain because I have never visited one before.

It should be quite obvious why courthouses have additional security, as well as federal buildings that may be subject to acts of terrorism by some far-right extremist, such as what occurred in Oklahoma City.

Florida State DMV Offices

When I first moved to Florida in 2000 there were "DMV" offices; additionally, some movtor vehicle related functions could also be done at the local county clerks office. The functions were later consolidated into the county clerks offices.

In some offices that I have been to you walk into an initial entryway and queue up (in lines guided by these) to where you speak to a clerk, tell him what you want, show him your ID and renewal documentation. Then they will give you a number and will direct you to the appropriate area to go to. You then sit in a large waiting area and wait for your number to be called. In other buildings you walk into a large lobby with a waiting area, line up to speak to a clerk, tell them what you want (or show them your renewal info), they will give you a number. Then you find a seat and wait for your number to be called. For some drivers license related functions you can now schedule an appointment for a specific time online. This cuts down on wait times.

And yes, there are plenty of chairs and of course there is A/C....it is Florida after all.

The Florida process is much more convenient than it was when I lived in Illinois. In Illinois (when I lived there) you walked in and then stood in a line and snaked along until you got to the clerk that could help you. I think that my longest wait at an IL dmv, snaking back and forth while standing in line, was more than 1 1/2 hours. The process might have changed since then.

Just as information, federal (as well as other state/governmental) buildings have been subject to attacks by left wing extremists as well.

 

[Formaldehyde]

When I first moved to Florida in 2000 there were "DMV" offices; additionally, some movtor vehicle related functions could also be done at the local county clerks office. The functions were later consolidated into the county clerks offices.

Well, there you go. Just like I said.

In some offices that I have been to you walk into an initial entryway and queue up (in lines guided by these) to where you speak to a clerk, tell him what you want, show him your ID and renewal documentation.

Only you don't show have to show them any ID or any documentation. That is not their job. They just give you a number to talk to the appropriate clerk based on what you claim you need. Now if you shove documents in their face or a drivers license, they will possibly try to determine what you need while wondering why you didn't just tell them.

But you can just walk right by them and have a seat while enjoying the free AC if you wish to do so. The likely overweight and middle-aged guard, who also seems to be responsible for policing the trash from the seating area, might eventually get suspicious if you sit there all day though. I have no idea what might happen then though.

Just as information, federal (as well as other state/governmental) buildings have been subject to attacks by left wing extremists as well.

I didn't claim there wasn't any attacks by leftists.

But it is interesting to note the last one occurred in 1983 over the invasion of Grenada. And none of them were attacks on state buildings as you seemingly claimed.

I can't think of a single terrorist attack against a state or county office building. Can you?

 

[chijohnaok]

And none of them were attacks on state buildings as you seemingly claimed.

I can't think of a single terrorist attack against a state or county office building. Can you?

Attacks by leftists on state or county buildings:

Weather Underground

1969

October 6, 1969 – The Haymarket Police Statue in Chicago is bombed; Weathermen later claim credit for the bombing in their book, Prairie Fire.
[I believe that the statue is city property]

December 6, 1969 – Bombing of several Chicago police cars parked in a precinct parking lot at 3600 North Halsted Street, Chicago.
[I know exactly where this station is. I was grew up a mile away from that police station]

1970

January - Silas and Judith Bissell placed a home-made bomb under the steps of the R.O.T.C. building. The bomb was made from an electric blasting cap, an alarm clock, a battery and a plastic bag filled with gasoline and explosives.

February 16 – A bomb is detonated at the Golden Gate Park branch of the San Francisco Police Department, killing one officer and injuring a number of other policemen (one seriously). No organization claims credit.

June 9 - The New York City Police headquarters is bombed by Jane Alpert and accomplices. Weathermen state this is in response to "police repression."[12][13] The bomb made with ten sticks of dynamite exploded in the NYC Police Headquarters

On September 20, 1970, the group robbed a National Guard armory in Newburyport, Massachusetts and took 400 rounds of ammunition.[7] They also stole weapons and set fire to the facility, causing about $125,000 in damage.

October 6 - Second bombing of Chicago's Haymarket Police monument

October 8 - Bombing of Marin County courthouse.

October 10 - A Queens traffic-court building is bombed.

October 11 - A Courthouse in Long Island City, NY is bombed

1971

August 30 - Bombings of the Office of California Prisons in Sacramento and San Francisco,

September 17 - The New York Department of Corrections in Albany, New York is bombed

1973

May 18 - The bombing of the 103rd Police Precinct in New York.

1974

May 31 - The Office of the California Attorney General is bombed.

1977

November - Five WUO members are arrested on conspiracy to bomb California State Senator, John Brigg's offices.

Source for the above:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Weatherman_actions

 

[Leonel]

Attacks by leftists on state or county buildings:

Weather Underground

1969

October 6, 1969 – The Haymarket Police Statue in Chicago is bombed; Weathermen later claim credit for the bombing in their book, Prairie Fire.
[I believe that the statue is city property]

December 6, 1969 – Bombing of several Chicago police cars parked in a precinct parking lot at 3600 North Halsted Street, Chicago.
[I know exactly where this station is. I was grew up a mile away from that police station]

1970

January - Silas and Judith Bissell placed a home-made bomb under the steps of the R.O.T.C. building. The bomb was made from an electric blasting cap, an alarm clock, a battery and a plastic bag filled with gasoline and explosives.

February 16 – A bomb is detonated at the Golden Gate Park branch of the San Francisco Police Department, killing one officer and injuring a number of other policemen (one seriously). No organization claims credit.

June 9 - The New York City Police headquarters is bombed by Jane Alpert and accomplices. Weathermen state this is in response to "police repression."[12][13] The bomb made with ten sticks of dynamite exploded in the NYC Police Headquarters

On September 20, 1970, the group robbed a National Guard armory in Newburyport, Massachusetts and took 400 rounds of ammunition.[7] They also stole weapons and set fire to the facility, causing about $125,000 in damage.

October 6 - Second bombing of Chicago's Haymarket Police monument

October 8 - Bombing of Marin County courthouse.

October 10 - A Queens traffic-court building is bombed.

October 11 - A Courthouse in Long Island City, NY is bombed

1971

August 30 - Bombings of the Office of California Prisons in Sacramento and San Francisco,

September 17 - The New York Department of Corrections in Albany, New York is bombed

1973

May 18 - The bombing of the 103rd Police Precinct in New York.

1974

May 31 - The Office of the California Attorney General is bombed.

1977

November - Five WUO members are arrested on conspiracy to bomb California State Senator, John Brigg's offices.

Source for the above:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Weatherman_actions

I'm going to use the same brush off Christians use and say that that was 40 years ago and no longer relevant!

 

[chijohnaok]

I'm going to use the same brush off Christians use and say that that was 40 years ago and no longer relevant!

Formaldehyde said he couldn't think of one incident of a leftist attack on a state or county building. He then asked if I could. And I did.

As for the timelines and relevance of terrorist attacks or church policies towards apostasy were (how recently something happened) I would agree with you that incidents may sometimes no longer be relevant or indicative of current events because they happened too far in the past.

Leftist terrorist attacks that happened 40 years ago may no longer be relevant to or indicative of current events because they happened so long ago.

Christian wars in the name of religion (the Crusades) may no longer be indicative of today's current events because they happened so long ago. The last Crusade was over 500 years ago. So the Crusades may not be relevant.

The relevance of Jail or death sentences for apostasy in Islam vs apostasy in Christianity may be dependent on how recently they were imposed in each respective religion or by governments.

 

[Commodore]

Formaldehyde said he couldn't think of one incident of a leftist attack on a state or county building. He then asked if I could. And I did.

Did you think of them though, or did you have to do a Google search to find those incidents?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Most of what you posted aren't even attacks on state or local office buildings, and many of them were courthouses which were already covered. But there are indeed a few where state buildings were bombed. Bravo! But none of the ones in the previous article you posted were, which is why I asked if anybody knew of any.

Now, do you think these handful of bombings mean that all state and local government office buildings should have armed guards demanding proof of identity from anybody wearing a niqab, which was your original "theory" above?



Do you really think it is worth spending tens of billions of dollars per year on a problem that doesn't even really exist, except on an exceptionally rare occasion?

 

[chijohnaok]

Did you think of them though, or did you have to do a Google search to find those incidents?

I knew from prior reading about them that the Weathermen Underground had attacked a police station or a local government building somewhere but didn't recall the specifics.

I grew up in Chicago and have seen the Haymarket police statue that they bombed. (I have a photo of the statue saved somewhere among the thousands of photos that I have taken). I didn't remember all the specifics though and then did an internet search and found that list of incidents. I didn't want to either incorrectly recollect an incident or be accused of referencing events that didn't actually occur.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I suppose if you really stretch the definition that a police station could be considered to be a government office building. Obviously, nobody can just walk into one though without coming under at least some scrutiny, so they are really exempt from this particular discussion along with courthouses.

 

[chijohnaok]

Now, do you think these handful of bombings mean that all state and local government office buildings should have armed guards demanding proof of identity from anybody wearing a niqab, which was your original "theory" above?

I would think that the level of security at a particular government building would be based on a variety of factors, including but not limited to things such as: past threats at that location, "chatter" picked up by law enforcement/intelligence experts, the security vulnerability of the site, what is actually housed at that location, etc.
I would think that professional security experts would be more qualified to make security determinations than I am. If lawmakers (hopefully taking the recommendations of professional security experts into accounts) weigh in on this and pass laws setting minimum requirements, then so be it.

As for potential threats related to those wearing a niqab, they are real, not just imagined:
Cameroon bans Islamic face veil after suicide bombings
Chad bans Islamic face veil after suicide bombings
In December, 2009, a suicide bomber dressed in a full veil and abaya gained access to a ceremony attended by Somali government officials in Mogadishu and killed 19 people, including three cabinet ministers.
In February, 2010, a female suicide bomber killed 54 Shia pilgrims in Baghdad.
In December, 2010 in Pakistan, a woman wearing a burqa threw a grenade and detonated an explosive vest at a U.N. security checkpoint, killing 41 people.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/97860/terrorists-drag-bombs-beneath-burqa-phyllis-chesler

Threats posed by those wearing niqab/burkas isn't limited to Middle Eastern/African countries:
Bank robbers in New Jersey disquised in burkas.
Bank robber in the UK disguised in a burka.
Burqa bank robberies spread to Ohio
Burka-wearing gunmen raid French bank
Man wearing burqa robs U.S. Bank in Euclid
Burkas worn by robbers in $500K Toronto jewelry store heist
Burqa bandit in armed cash grab - Sydney, AUS

Does a county clerks office in rural Idaho or Vermont that has had no past history of attacks or current terror threats need armed guards and metal detectors? Probably not.
Does a county clerks office in Manhattan, NY near the World Trade Center need armed guards and metal detectors? Perhaps so.

Again, I say let the professional security experts and lawmakers make those sorts of decisions.

Do you really think it is worth spending tens of billions of dollars per year on a problem that doesn't even really exist, except on an exceptionally rare occasion?

Do you have a source for the "tens of billions of dollars per year"?

"...a problem that doesn't even really exist, except on an exceptionally rare occasion".

I suppose that if you are never personally affected then its not really a problem.
When you, your friends, family or loved ones are impacted then it is a problem.

Lawmakers and law enforcement are damned by some for taking steps that some feel are excessive and expensive. They are also damned when attacks happen that result in injury and death and its discovered that security measures that many would consider to have beeen common sense were overlooked or intentionally not implemented.

 

[El_Machinae]

Maybe Formaldehyde could just make a list of buildings he thinks we should be allowed to wear masks in. Not comprehensive, but ones there might be controversy about.

Should I be allowed to wear a mask in bank? A government facility? A convenience store? A public-facing gov't facility? A courthouse?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Is a modesty covering practiced by an extremely tiny group of women in Canada for clearly religious reasons a "mask"? Really?

If a government building actually demands by law that photo ID be checked by the police prior to entering, I have no problem at all with them requiring the woman momentarily remove her niqab so it can be compared to her ID.

 

[El_Machinae]

Is a modesty covering practiced by an extremely tiny group of women in Canada for clearly religious reasons a "mask"? Really?

Yes. It's a mask. What else would you call it?
Are you suggesting policies that allow some women to wear masks, but others not be allowed to?

Remember, a policy has to be universally acceptable to be fair. I won't want to wear a mask, it's not in my culture. But I don't want to be forbidden from wearing a mask if other people are allowed to.

 

[warpus]

Yes. It's a mask. What else would you call it?
Are you suggesting policies that allow some women to wear masks, but others not be allowed to?

Remember, a policy has to be universally acceptable to be fair. I won't want to wear a mask, it's not in my culture. But I don't want to be forbidden from wearing a mask if other people are allowed to.

That's the thing with religious exceptions to laws, that's what happens - you end up allowing some group of people to do {A}, but disallow the rest of the citizenry from doing {A}.

It's been going on for a while, at least in Canada. Only Sikh RCMP officers are allowed to wear turbans for example, IIRC.

I don't see a way around it, if we're going to continue to offer such exceptions to the religious.

 

[El_Machinae]

Yeah, Canada has a system where we allow specific exemptions. In general, I'm perfectly okay with that, since most of it is fairly meaningless. I mean, Sikh's aren't allowed to not wear motorcycle helmets. Nun's aren't allowed to wear a habit in the operating room. Etc. So, there are exemptions, and then there are places where the religious exception doesn't apply.

We've right decided that that Sikh wearing a turban as a bus driver or as an RCMP officer doesn't matter. We've made a special exemption for 'turbans' in those circumstances. But we still tested it against common sense.

I just don't think a mask will pass the same common sense sniff test. It will necessarily need to be forbidden in more venues. We'll make exemptions (like with the citizenship oath) where it's harmless to do so, and the right thing to do. But it cannot be broadly accepted.