FINALMENTE A CRISE MOSTROU OS CULPADOS, MAS SEM CRIMES

Somente depois da recente reunião realizada na Basiléia, Suíça, sede dos BIS ou USB (Banco Central dos Bancos Centrais), com a presença de Governadores ou Presidentes dos Bancos Centrais dos países do Grupo do G-10, compreendendo Bélgica, Canadá, França, Itália , Japão, Holanda, Suécia, Suíça, Inglaterra e Estados Unidos, foi possível saber, de direito, porque de fato já sabíamos, que os responsáveis
Pela propalada e administrada “Crise Mundial...” são os Cartéis do Sistema Financeiro e os Bancos Centrais, por omissão.

Essa reunião da Basiléia deixou bem claro que os Bancos Centrais dos Países mais ricos do Mundo, venceram a queda de braço contra o Tesouro Nacional americano e mostraram, sem nenhum constrangimento, que são verdadeiros agentes do sistema financeiro mundial. Enquanto o Secretário americano defendia ajuda restrita às vítimas inocentes das subprimes, limitada aos USD 160 bilhões, o FED (banco central americano) cobrava a ampliação desses benefícios aos especuladores e aos Bancos, indistintamente e foi o grande vencedor da peleja, em prejuízo de bilhões de dólares a milhões de contribuintes. E o FED está fazendo redescontos de títulos com garantia de 85% do Valor de Face, quando é sabido que a cotação desses papéis não passa de 10%. E uma prova transparente de que as Raposas continuam Fiscalizando os Aviários.

O interessante é que o sistema financeiro , através dos Bancos Centrais, sem necessidade de compromisso com o povo ou de representatividade através de eleições populares diretas, conquistou poderes absolutos para manipular mercado , inflação, juros e ainda com a vantagem de sacar do Tesouro Nacional, sem limite, recursos para a cobertura de fabulosos prejuízos ( R$ 48 bilhões foram sacados recente pelo BC Brasil) FAZ BEM LEMBRAR o que disse THOMAS JEFFERSON, EX-PRESIDENTE AMERICANO: “Se o povo americano alguma vez permitir aos bancos controlarem a questão da nossa dívida, primeiro através da inflação, depois pela deflação, os bancos e as corporações que crescerão privarão o povo de toda a prosperidade até que os seus filhos acordem sem casa no continente que os seus pais conquistaram”. A profecia está se materializando e mais de dois milhões dos americanos (vítimas inocentes) estão abandonando as suas casas, porque foram enganados e manipulados pela ganância da especulação financeira.

A era Greenspan, de juros negativos e de excesso de liquidez, com os ganhos abusivos nos países em desenvolvimento (continua até hoje), alastrou a especulação habitacional e de outros ativos de risco, mostrando uma prosperidade irreal e deixou os Bancos totalmente livres para a manipulação do mercado financeiro Mundial . E os Bancos Centrais não estão sendo capazes ou não querem mostrar a dimensão dessa crise e até parece que desejam que a instabilidade e as incertezas continuem. De acordo com o IIF ( Instituto de Finanças Internacionais), os Emergentes devem receber um fluxo de capitais de mais de US$ 730 bilhões este ano, sendo somente que US$ 260 bilhões em investimentos Diretos e o restante para giro na especulação financeira volátil, que não gera mais produção , emprego ou renda. E esse capital nocivo continua vasculhando o planeta, em busca de atrativos ganhos em países como os do Brasil, que infelizmente sempre privilegiou esse capital em detrimento das prioridades maiores da Nação.

A fraqueza do Tesouro americano. demonstrada frente ao seu Banco Central , como vem anunciando alguns jornais, já despertou em muitos países a necessidade de devolver ao Congresso Nacional o controle do dinheiro e a sua volta às mãos do povo, mas com competência, seriedade e total TRANSPARENCIA. As lições valiosas do passado, a partir de 1929 de nada serviram ou estão servindo, exatamente porque os países democráticos continuam socializando prejuízos de bilhões de dólares (do povo) em favor de uma ínfima minoria de especuladores e banqueiros internacionais. Esperamos que o governo brasileiro tenha maturidade suficiente e não seja embevecido com o noticiário bajulador da imprensa internacional, mostrando o País como o berço da prosperidade para esse capital nocivo. Basta lembrar, com uma certa tristeza que o crescimento real estupendo das receitas do Tesouro não foi suficiente para conter uma dívida de US$ 157 bilhões em janeiro de 1991 que passou para R$ 1,333,8 trilhão em 2007 e deve chegar a R$ 1.540 trilhão em 2008, de acordo com projeções do Banco Central.Tudo isso, depois do pagamento, no mesmo período, de alguns bilhões de dólares em juros e encargos financeiros. Somente de 2007 para 2008 haverá um crescimento nominal da dívida em mais de R$ 200 bilhões, independentemente dos juros que serão pagos com o aproveitamento do superávit primário. E de 1991 para cá esses bilhões de reaias que estão gerando novos endividamentos estão sendo direcionados única e exclusivamente para alimentar a ciranda financeira ou o capital de “motel” e a concratação de riquezas. Esperávamos, sinceramente, que os Bancos Centrais e o FMI , na reunião da Basiléia apresentassem soluções concretas para o MONITORAMENTO DO SISTEMA FINANCEIRO, NA DEFESA DE BILHÕES DE PESSOAS.OS AMERICANOS E A UNIÃO EUROPEIA, EM NOME DA CRISE, ESTÃO GANHANDO ALGUNS BILHÕES DE DÓLARES ANUAIS, ROLANDO DÍVIDAS DE MAIS DE US$ 20 TRILHÕES A CUSTO ZERO OU MESMO NEGATIVO. NADA MAU PARA QUEM ESTÁ EM CRISE.

I can't wait to see gazza go up in flames.

How can you call yourself an arab and show that you accept a "state of israel" -- FREE PALESTINE!!

Although I agree with you on many points you give, I'll have to disagree with the whole point of your article. Let me clear something out first. Islam is a religion, a way of life. It has been bestowed on people so that they know how to run their life in the righteous path. Muslims, however, are different from Islam. Muslims are not all perfect but are struggling to be in life's path that Allah has given to them through Islam. You should not look at the unrighteous actions of other Muslims, like the Saudi and Iranian governments, and assume that they represent Islam 100%.

I do believe that it is much more important for someone to be pure from the inside and not wear a head scarf than one that does and is not pure. But I must tell you that you cannot just change your opinions about a common rule in Islam because thats what Islam is - whether you accept it or reject it thats your choice. You mentioned that over the years you didn't "believe" that the head scarf was mandatory anymore. You can't just say that. If you are a muslim that means you are giving up all your personal (negative or positive) opinions and relying on the decisions made by Islam. You are an Arab and were raised in the arab world, and if you knew well enough arabic and you actually read the Qur'an you would know that the Qur'an does state that it is highly obligatory for the woman to wear a headscarf. You saying that you changed your opinion on this obligation is simply a progressive act and is unlawful.

It is very disturbing and embarrassing to hear the stories of women that were forced to wear the headscarf, but I come from an arab country too (Syria) and a lot of woman wear it despite the secular views of the government. I do notice that every time a woman puts on the hijab by force, she ends up removing it and that is very sad. I dont believe in forcing anyone to wear the headscarf because otherwise you would be taking that person's right of choice. But has it ever come to your mind that many woman chose to put it on. I mean, just because a lot of woman wear it all of a sudden doesn't mean they were forced. Because especially in Egypt and Syria, there are so many different groups, you can chose whom you hang around with. If you feel like your being forced to doing something you don't want to, it is very easy to stay away from that environment and hang on to another one.

My last question is who makes the rules of whether the hijab (forced or not) is right or wrong? In other words, your coming on here telling everyone that hijab is the wrong way to go and that secularism is the right way to go. Well i have a question for you. Don't you think its wrong that the western or the fashion industry is doing the same thing in "secretly" persuading its citizens to wear tight clothes and material accessories? That the more cleavage you show the better. Don't you think thats an act of enforcement on citizens as well accept only secretive. To brainwash their minds into thinking that exposing their bodies will help them get better jobs and a better life. You show that you chose the secular way of things. But who are you to say that is the right way to go. People have their beliefs and your just going to have to accept that.

Whether Muslim, Christian, or Jew, woman have been wearing the head scarf for centuries in the past and it was all in an act of modesty. God has created the woman more beautiful than the man, thats her nature and to expose her body would be deceitful to her husband and to herself. The man also needs to be modest and for him to expose himself to the public would also be deceitful to his wife.

In response to one of your scenarios, if the woman of a whole neighborhood didn't wear the hijab and one woman chose to, don't you think that would be ridiculous to take it off just because the people around her would encourage it? It goes the same both ways.

I do agree with you in that we do have to focus more on issues. Notice I say issues and not womans issues. Because all issues need to be focused on and some more than others - like poverty, genocide etc. I really would have to agree with what Mr. Jawad Iqbal said. If you really did study Islam and focused on writing articles about its amazing attributes you would have never complained.

genbuvc gwbod ibxyr owajyqc apsihfwv jbxayfr nsuhrcaoy

I wore my hijab by force for 18 years. I hated every moment of it because I did not believe for a moment that the God of Mercy and Forgiveness....the God of Equality and Justice...deemed it necessary to create women with curves and breasts...with hair and skin...with a voice and smell....and then also deemed it necessary to order her to cover it all up....cause the man He created at the same time...just couldnt deal with it....

I removed my hijab one year ago...and guess what...I still believe in God....I still follow my faith...I can still think for myself....and it sure feels great having the breeze flowing through my hair again.

to coerce a woman to remove her hijab(headscarf) is the same as coercing a woman to wear one-

people will become alarmist and paranoid about ideas that they feel frightened of because they are different or alien to them and use whatever "reasoning" they can to justify their own bias.

when you inflict your will upon me- no matter how "right" you believe your position is-
i will still maintain my own right to determine my own actions.

despite ones personal discomfiture-
i will wear my hijab- my body- my choice.

it is not my responsibility to expalin, justify, educate or instruct your fears and misconceptions away.

i am simply amazed that anyone feels they have the right to have ANY opinion about what i wear, or why i wear it.

A "liberal, secular Muslim" who is "fed up with headscarves"....nothing surprising there. What does surprise me is that Eltahawy wants to propogate and even impose her secular "ideals" on people - especially women- who actually WANT to follow their faith and are steadfast in their beliefs. Being a self professed muslim, trying to "modernize" Islam is these so called progressives' agenda just so they can be accepted by the west as enlightened people, as Islam has been made synonymous with backwardness. Had Eltahawy studied - REALLY studies the Islamic moral codes and it's benefit to society, she would not be such a missionary of western appeasement.

All she has in her repertoire of Islam bashing weapons are examples of Saudia Arabia and Egypt, countires which have perverted Islam and it's timeless tenents to suit their tribalistic whims.

What the muslim world needs is not the Saudi version of Sharia or the Egyptian or Iranian brand of morality, but we also do not need so called secular liberals like Eltahawy who want to be the reformationists of Islam. An understanding of true Islamic values is necessary for us muslims to show the west and their appeasers that indeed Islam can not only exist as a political and social system on this planet, but can also be a catalyst to end all the social ills and the present malais of class injustices. I can only hope the author and her gang of liberals shed rid themselves of their contempt for Islam by only focusing on the anethma of the corrupt middle eastern culture disguised as Islam.

A "liberal, secular Muslim" who is "fed up with headscarves"....nothing surprising there. What does surprise me is that Eltahawy wants to propogate and even impose her secular "ideals" on people - especially women- who actually WANT to follow their faith and are steadfast in their beliefs. Being a self professed muslim, trying to "modernize" Islam is these so called progressives' agenda just so they can be accepted by the west as enlightened people, as Islam has been made synonymous with backwardness. Had Eltahawy studied - REALLY studies the Islamic moral codes and it's benefit to society, she would not be such a missionary of western appeasement.

All she has in her repertoire of Islam bashing weapons are examples of Saudia Arabia and Egypt, countires which have perverted Islam and it's timeless tenents to suit their tribalistic whims.

What the muslim world needs is not the Saudi version of Sharia or the Egyptian or Iranian brand of morality, but we also do not need so called secular liberals like Eltahawy who want to be the reformationists of Islam. An understanding of true Islamic values is necessary for us muslims to show the west and their appeasers that indeed Islam can not only exist as a political and social system on this planet, but can also be a catalyst to end all the social ills and the present malais of class injustices. I can only hope the author and her gang of liberals shed rid themselves of their contempt for Islam by only focusing on the anethma of the corrupt middle eastern culture disguised as Islam.

Ahmed,
Maybe you will get your wish due to Global Warming?

Mona is absolutely right. There is an unfortunate tendency among westerners to decide how "free" a woman is based solely on how she is dressed. But there is a lot more to freedom than a dress code. Property rights, marriage rights, voting rights, going-outside-without-male-relative-escort rights, no-forced-genital-mutilation rights, etc, are the things that we should be concerned about.

Let me give my brief assessment of what's going on in Turkey, which admittedly may only skim the surface of the issues.

After WWI ended the Ottoman Empire and took the Caliphate with it, Kamal Attaturk established Turkey as a secular nation. As a result of that basic decision, Turkey finally emerged in recent years as a full-blown democracy. No country is perfect, but overall, Turks enjoy the blessings of liberty and civil rights such as freedom of expression. They also enjoy the prosperity that goes along with democracy and free enterprise.

But Turkey's population is predominantly Muslim. And Islam in regard to democracy and personal freedoms is like a big black hole: it sucks up everything within its reach and imprisons it in the vortex, never to be seen or heard from again. Islam is never content to accept democracy and freedom. Islam sees such things as alien to its very soul. Islam sees itself as at war with democracy, and for Islam, it's a sum-zero game. There must be a winner and a loser. The black hole at the heart of Islam must suck up and imprison every aspect of modernity and democracy.

What we are witnessing in Turkey is the inevitable expansion of that black hole. Even after 90 years of secularism, modernity and democracy are too weak to escape its grasp.

The Turkish people are now doing something that we Westerners find inexplicable. They are voluntarily surrendering their freedoms and their democracy. They are, in increasing numbers, showing their willingness to sacrifice their rights on the altar of Islam. The Turks, with eyes wide open, are re-establishing a 7th century theocracy to rule over them. The religious mentality once more triumphs over secularism and rationality.

Outsiders, in the end, will be unable to do much to reverse this trend. The main lesson we Americans should draw from the Turkish experience, especially when it is combined with the experience of West European governments with their Muslim populations, is the danger of allowing a too great an expansion of the Muslim population in the United States. We are creating a big black hole, which will eventually begin devouring everything in its path.

Re: headscarf

The imposition of the veil or headscarf upon Muslim women is just one more tool their men are using to mark their stamp on them as their property. It is not a religious requirement. It is true that their prophet found it necessary to shroud his wives with Burqa, but that was for reasons that were special to his particular situation. First he had eleven wives living in the same household where all sort of men were continually coming in and out, supposedly to pay him homage. Also the wives used to go out at night to a clearing in their neighborhood to defecate, and men including Omar, one of the Prophet’s fathers in law, recognized some of them even in very dark nights.
Muslims who favor the veil rationalize that it is to “maintain a woman’s modesty”. A woman’s modesty if not protected from within can never be protected by a shroud or a scarf. On the contrary some prostitutes use the Burqa to facilitate the promotion of their business.
An emerging function of the veil is its use as a political statement. How else could we explain the fact that Islamists, at least in Egypt, are paying large sums of money to public figures in TV and movies to wear the headscarf. Recently a well-known Muslim cleric sued an Egyptian actress for taking off her scarf. In the West wearing of a scarf is not a political message as it is a statement of rejection of its way of life.

Mona,

I feel you on the point that the headscarf restriction limits women's rights, however looking at the history of Turkey Ataturk started the headscarf restrictions shortly after WWI to push forward women's rights. Pretty ironic, but he and others seemed to think that the headscarf was something that made women second class citizens in the muslim world, e.g. Saudi Arabia. Along with the headscarf restriction Ataturk pushed for women having voting rights, learning to read and write, running for public office.

I do know that there are pleanty women that wear the headscarfs for pious reason they personally believe, however the probable trend is like the examples you listed: Saudi Arabia, Egypt now, Iran, where the community forces women to wear headscarfs through intimidation or with threat of force. So by in removing the headscarf restriction the government allows the possibility of the public forcing a new headscarf restriction. It's pretty ironic that a muslim man can wear any clothing he desires, like western clothing, but his wife or muslim women he has with him are required to wear traditional Middle Eastern coverings.

I do think that the headscarf restriction has probably run its course in Turkey. And I applaud the AKP if they follow through with supporting freedom as they say is their intention. It would be terrible if the restriction lifting allows communities to force women to wear headscarfs and limit their rights.

"I am a Muslim. I wore a headscarf for nine years. And I am fed up with headscarves"

Wearing a headscarve is an obligation from Allah to Moslem women who are sincere and who use it as way to worship the creator.

COULDN'T ELTAHAWI USE A MORE RESPECTFUL WORD THAN THE "FED UP" THING.....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is for Afghan Women:
Afghans have never been extremists. They are not terrorists, they are not fundamentalists. So, please stand up for your rights. There are far more important issues we should go after than coving our hair. This Hijab has come from Saudi and Burqa from Pakistan. It is not an Afghan culture. Covering your head does not make you a Muslim. Wearing decent and stand up for your rights.

This is for Afghan Women:
Afghans have never been extremists. They are not terrorists, they are not fundamentalists. So, please stand up for your rights. There are far more important issues we should go after than coving our hair. This Hijab has come from Saudi and Burqa from Pakistan. It is not an Afghan culture. Covering your head does not make you a Muslim. Wearing decent and stand up for your rights.

This is for Afghan Women:
Afghans have never been extremists. They are not terrorists, they are not fundamentalists. So, please stand up for your rights. There are far more important issues we should go after than coving our hair. This Hijab has come from Saudi and Burqa from Pakistan. It is not an Afghan culture. Covering your head does not make you a Muslim. Wearing decent and stand up for your rights.

The author seems to be more interested in headscarves as a symbol of freedom than the realization that promoting headscarves is a symbol of despotism.

As a foreigner living in Turkey, I am also ambivalent about the headscarf ban, but for one overriding reason; I see the daily erosion the AK Party is making on its road to making Turkey an Islamist country. Although there are numerous cases to which I can point, the most recent is the decision to ban alcohol sales and the dismantling of the popular beachfront clubs in nearby Cesme, less than an hour's drive from Izmir. The reported reason? Pious Moslems don't like how the "foreigners" behave in front of modest Turkish Moslem women. Scantily-clad foreign women and carousing foreign men bother the pious when they (the pious) go to the beach club area of Ay Yorgi, Cesme. Ay Yorgi is one of the trendiest upscale beach areas in this part of Turkey. Locals and foreigners alike throng to the beaches, bars, restaurants and don't hesitate to pay Rivieria-like prices for the opportunity to see and be seen as a regular.
It's a case of the few pious Moselms that are dictating to the many secular Turks and foreigners. This sort of thing was unheard of before AK Party came to power.

i m really glad to see as u so tender and sensitive woman about this problem

you may be right at some pionts but dont you think that muslims have been totured by secularism
in Turkey for a very long time and practising your bielifs is your major right of course i am not with opposesion

The headscarf is just a symptom of the overall problem/disease. The problem with the muslim world is that there appear to be so few moderates and liberals to push for the kind of rights that are needed. Education. Health care. The fight against poverty. The right to wear or not wear a scarf is just one of the many.

Women in muslim countries will just never be treated as equals unless their society goes through a reformation or an enlightenment, like we did in the west; one that can only be led by muslim men and women who insist that things change. And it obviously won't be the religious conservatives. (It never is).

Until such time, all we can do in the US is shake our heads and conddmn honor killings and other horrid practices.

Catholic girls were supposed to cover their heads in church when i was a girl. that went by the wayside. who even remembers it now? silly things die away.

I wholeheartedly agree! I find it awful that these governments must obsess over women when women don't even have a say in them! And I commend your strength to remain an individual, with a scarf on or not. I wish American government would just but out of what ought to be solely female issues, such as abortion, especially when 70% of the government demanding abortion reform is male. They just don't have a *claim*! And the decision to cover one's hair should be entirely up to women; not to men and government at all.

There are so much more important issues regarding women: inequal societal recognition, inequal pay, brutality, and the even more threatening issues in the East... why don't they pay attention to *that*?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k30MOebDSww

what a backwards looking religion islam is and has evolved to be. it's more about control and how much control you, as a free woman, are wanting to accept. every woman in the us i know looks at scarved muslim women with contempt for allowing a man, or anyone, to dictate how they appear in public.

don't tell me it's by choice. islamic women aren't able to choose for themselves, that's the bottom line.

Dan, you said:
DAN :
The issue about headscarves is less about the headscarf and more an issue of control. If a woman wants to wear a headscarf, there is no issue. Either in this country or in Europe or in Turkey. A woman should be allowed to wear a headscarf.
However, all too often a woman is FORCED to wear a headscarf and that is were the problem is.
The headscarf itself is just a visible representation of the slippery slope that leads to sharia law. It becomes the proverbial straw that broke the camels back. And it is in this that people cringe at the sight of the headscarf.

I couldn't agree more. I will add, to me, the headscarf is a symbol. It is symbolic of the control Islamic men have over their women. Not symbolic of the love these women have for their "God". It shows a backwardness that these sharia laws are becoming more prominent, and I'm not just referring to the veil, I mean all the injustices women in Islam are subjected to. It's hideous.

Maria,
Your logic makes no sense, God created us with no clothes. using your logic, why should we wear clothes at all?

You said it, let's talk a bout women's important issues. You included education as an important issue, and this is what it is all about. Headscarf is not banned in Turkey, but women who wear it are banned from universities. This issue is about the right of scarved women to get a university education, so it is an important issue.

I believe in tradition and the sanctity of faith but if one does not believe then it is not faith. To force someone to do something and say it is because of their belief that is not logical. As well as protecting women from the man predator who does not have the power to overcome his animal instinct and attack the female, I think men and women have more inner power than some outer force telling them what to do. Peolpe who have gone through great agony were able to survive on innner force.. this is what I believe everyone must be taught by parents, church or even self realization. I am sad that so many still suffer from these misconceptions yet I do have the faith that more will be released from these powers.

I think this issues resurfaces so often because it is one that women deal with everyday- the decision to wear, or not to wear a headscarf impacts the way that women are viewed and treated in Turkish society and in the world at large. Before I lived in Turkey, I thought the banning of the headscarf in Universities was ridiculous, discriminatory and anti-free speech. However, after living there, I became much more sympathetic with the secularists, and the issue became more complex to me. First, whenever I walked through a more conservative neighborhood in Istanbul, and I was the only non-scarved woman, I felt as the author described the current situation in Egypt- I was singled out and pressured- a western floozie in contrast to the scarved women in the neighborhood and as such I got alot of unwanted attention from men. If Ataturk had not banned the headscarf, I don't think many Turkish women would have ever been able to stand against the social pressure to wear the scarf. Had I chosen to don the scarf, it would've been solely as a protection against men. That seems unfortunate- couldn't the men be raised to respect women regardless of their apparel? And I must note that Turkish women have been free to wear the scarf in the street, just not in universities and government buildings which I guess were supposed to be safe havens for women- filled with bastions of enlightened men who would not be harassing them.

Though I would hate to feel socially pressured into wearing a head scarf, I have discovered that I really enjoy wearing them as well as other forms of modest islamic clothing. I have worn the headscarf and long (Iranian style) coat when traveling to Yemen, and I must say that I really enjoyed wearing both. When it took me all of 5 minutes to get out of bed and out the door in the mornings- I did not feel oppressed, I felt liberated from doing my hear and picking out clothing. On a recent month long trip to India, I wore salwar kameez the whole time and also loved it. When I returned home to my western clothing, they seemed so uncomfortable, unelegant and constrictive by contrast. Which clothing is right for a liberated woman? Which is more oppressive? Which is more attractive? I really don't know anymore.

Faith, Fashion, or Force?

I agree wholeheartedly that religious devotion must come from within oneself, and that includes the personal decesion to wear a headscarf as an external sign of an inward faith. There is, indeed, a correlation between the growing influence of islamist organizations on the one hand, and increased use of the headscarf, on the other, but does the one actually cause the other? Is the increased use of the veil a sign of increased personal faith, fashion, or force?

Groups like Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood indeed have an enlarged political influence, but the essay fails to demonstrate any factual linkage between the influence of the Ikhwan Muslimiin (Muslim Brotherhood) and the increased wearing of headscarves.

My own interactions with educated Muslim women in Egypt, some of whom wear headscarves, indicates that they felt no pressure to "take the hijab," but did so for personal, devotional, reasons. These same women (ages roughly 18 to 35) commented that the use of the hijab is, in fact, growing in Egypt, but they considered it a more of a response to current fashion than pressure from home or from the government. No doubt, some women in Egypt are forced, or at least feel compelled for family or social reasons, to wear the hijab, but does this reflect a shift in attitudes, the adoption of a new governmental policy, or the unfortunate dysfunctionality of some families, or rural society?

Is there any clear evidence of a causal link between the adoption of the hijab, and the growing political presence of the Ikhwan? If so, please present it. Or is this, once again, and example of the same post hoc fallacies that plague almost all relations between the West and Islam?

Furhan:

With the greatest respect, you are wrong about Christians.

Christians don't believe in an all-forgiving God. The God of Abraham forgives only after the condition of repentance has been met, and price of repentance can be very high. The price of repentance is so high, in fact, that formerly "Christian" countries have abandoned the faith entirely. Western European nations, once thought of by Muslims as "the Christian world", no longer practice the religion.

The Christians who do are divided about the need for intermediaries between themselves and God of Abraham (I refer now to the role of ordained priests and ministers; the religious scholars, you mentioned, have no status whatsoever in Christianity). Some Christians are committed to Sects and believe that they have an obligation to follow religious leaders. Period.

Others believe the God of Abraham is all-powerful, powerful enough to influence the human conscience directly. A divinely-inspired conscience creates an obligation in the follower to act, an obligation that supercedes all other obligations. A divinely-inspired Christian has an obligation to disobey sectarian, government, or family authority if the God of Abraham wills it. And here is the key point.

Although the vast majority of Christians believe prophecy ended with the age of the apostles, most also believe in the ability of God to inspire individuals. And although it is called "inspiration" now, it would have been called revelation and prophesy in the primitive church. A perfectly respectable man, like Mohammad (peace be upon him) would have been the perfect candidate for that inspiration. So would Mohammad's wife, the first convert to Islam. So, would you, Furhan. So, would your righteous sons and daughters.

All who worship the God of Abraham call Him all-powerful, but behave as if He were far less than that.

I am not wearing a thing on my head for any reason, unless it is 20 below outside. All religions are like a club you join, and you have to have your uniform and your hat, and eat this on Tuesday, and it is WAY beyond pitiful. It is like belonging to the Chevron Station. Oh me? I belong to the Chevron Station. I have gas! I will eat what I want too. A hamburger will not get you into or keep your out of a state of grace. Forget what is ON your head. What is IN your head. Do you have anything at ALL in your heart. Is it empty too? Let people do what they want. But don't tell me that wearing a scarf is going to make all these a-----e men think any higher than their crotch. THEY are the problem. As you may have noticed, all religions are patriarchal. Do what we say, not what we do. The ultimate funny scenario would be for all the women to refuse to have any male babies. Then, after a while, we would all go somewhere else, as Michio Kaku has explained in his telling of the string theory, and the earth could recover to its former gorgeous state, with the plants and the critters supreme. None of them would have anything on their heads.

I am not wearing a thing on my head for any reason, unless it is 20 below outside. All religions are like a club you join, and you have to have your uniform and your hat, and eat this on Tuesday, and it is WAY beyond pitiful. It is like belonging to the Chevron Station. Oh me? I belong to the Chevron Station. I have gas! I will eat what I want too. A hamburger will not get you into or keep your out of a state of grace. Forget what is ON your head. What is IN your head. Do you have anything at ALL in your heart. Is it empty too? Let people do what they want. But don't tell me that wearing a scarf is going to make all these a-----e men think any higher than their crotch. THEY are the problem. As you may have noticed, all religions are patriarchal. Do what we say, not what we do. The ultimate funny scenario would be for all the women to refuse to have any male babies. Then, after a while, we would all go somewhere else, as Michio Kaku has explained in his telling of the string theory, and the earth could recover to its former gorgeous state, with the plants and the critters supreme. None of them would have anything on their heads.

The whole world is equally fed up with headscarves! And the rapidly spreading fire of islamic radicalization which is almost on the verge of engulfing yet another 'secular' nation - a rare phenomenon in the islamic part of the globe. Wonder why people 'welcome' such regressive developments orchestrated by religious extremists - politicians in Turkey - and make their own lives hell?

The sad facts are that the world's "Book" religions (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism) were all from a tribal mentality (Abraham) and rooted in patriarchal practices which make no sense outside of the religious context to those of us who are secularists. Historians know the roots well, but why modern theologists can't move from the 1200's into the Age of Reason (where are Jefferson and Madison, etc. now) and people lack the self confidence to challenge the stranglehold of the mullah's, priest's, and clergy/rabbi's who use their science fiction Book to control lives is beyond me.
Women are the hope of the world in terms of sustaining families, peace, and discussions without macho posturing that men seem to bring to the discussion. Note the recent Baptist thing about women submitting to their husbands. If Christians took only those topics Jesus made a stand for, he definitely attacked the ruling/theocracy classes and worked for the common person, including women in his ministry (don't bring Paul in, he is definitely out there). Surely, Muslim scholars and Rabbi's can find examples of positive roles for women as well in their holy Books.
Choice versus bullying is occurring in this world and the bullies are the theocrats of the mainline faiths.

I appreciate the statements in the posts made by those of you who identify yourselves as Muslims that assert head covering for Muslim women is a voluntary practice, not an obligatory one. It's my understanding that indeed the practice is, or has been, voluntary in some Muslim countries.

That said, it would be very helpful if one or more of you would address the issue of mutilations and murders that are on the rise in such countries as Afghanistan and Iraq, as reported by local authorities in those regions. To name a few other countries where the voluntary nature of head covering actually isn't: Saudi Arabia, as well as Iran, which hasn't yet entirely relaxed an enforcement of the practice that underwent years of brutal (and well-documented) enforcement.

Clearly, when women are being mutilated and murdered not in small numbers and occasionally, but in large numbers and over a period of many, many years, not to mention in a number of different countries, I am sure you will agree that to discuss the forced wearing of head scarves as a bad practice "in principle" is not particularly helpful, as it rather fails altogether to consider how to address and constructively respond to the issue. Mutilation and murder are serious matters, they tend to be viewed seriously by the victims (pre-death, that is; what their views are post-death is anybody's guess), as well as by their families and friends. As human beings who, I am sure, care about other human beings enough to prevent harm befalling them, what are your thoughts about ways to solve this terrible and ongoing problem?

Someones say *Attturk was a drunkard pedophile-a historic fact*
No,it is not historic fact,but let me tell the *absolute historic fact*
Ataturk didnt rape six year-old child girl.
Ataturk didnt seduce his stepson's wife.

Headscarf is NOT freedom,on the contrary,it is the mark of enslavement.
Headscarf is NOT Human Right,on the contrary,it is subjugation.
Democracy means *men and women are equal*

Back before 1968 Catholic women had to cover their heads to enter church, my mother and sisters wore head scarves younger women might only wear a small veil. It all changed and now there is no requirement to worship a God that loves all humans, head covered or not.

This person might be of great help to you.

http://www.cair.com/audio/savage_102907.asp

Please listen to him and stay out of the Moslem world. It is better for you to stay in US. Those who don't care about us are NOT FROM US...

PEACE TO YOU

When I dreamed of being a revolutionary in college I thought Ataturk was a good role model. Now that I have dedicated my life to God I am certain that his policies of banning God from public discourse are disastrous.

I can see parallels in America.

Maria and Patricia both wrote comments that touch on a little known Christian fact. The New Testament, like Islam, requires women to cover their heads (1 Corinthians 11:1-12). This rule seems to be limited to prayer and/or worship. The reasoning is not altogether clear.

Nevertheless, there is a great deal that Christianity and Islam have in common. Many think that it is good that the west and other "enlightened" people have moved beyond holy scripture. However, I see practical benefits in women covering their bodies modestly.

Not seeing the complete form limits men's lust which is the cause of many social ills. Likewise, there is less chance that a man will desire another's wife if he cannot even see her.

I imagine that engaging a women in conversation without being able to judge her physical beauty would make a man concentrate on what's important, the inside. Her heart and mind.

Obviously, this is not a perfect solution. But, often overlooked in the East-West divide, or battle of civilizations is the cultural aspect.

Can we blame Muslims for not wanting: crass commercialism that glorifies meaningless material things, high murder rates, high out of wedlock births, greed, war, and entertainment focused on perpetuating lifestyles focused on sex and violence?

How wrong can it be for ruling authorities to enforce rules in societies that encourage the best in men and women? We overemphasize freedom in meaningless often areas, they overemphasize control over often meaningless things.

Enlightened leadership that truly teaches love, peace and discipline would be an improvement all around.

Having spent much of my life following the crowd and my selfish desires I can truly attest to the fact that freedom and hedonism aren't all they are cracked up to be.

That pretty much says it all. I'm so sick of men showing their political and religious leanings on the bodies of women. Great article.

"...that the ultra conservative are the same everywhere, especially when it came to women."

And so I fear this year's presidential election. The Republican Party debating within itself, whether Senator McCain is conservative enough and Governor Huckabee riding a tidal wave of conservative/fundamentalist support. It is the same extremism that thrives on intolerance for those with differing views, whether religious, social, or political.

Thank you for continuing to keep this issue alive and in our face for such a discussion. I agree, it's so much more a control issue than a headscarf issue. Fifty years ago I too wore a lace head covering to church and sometimes when I compare the reasons then with what these women face, though minor in comparison, I remember the pressure my mother felt to have all us girls (6) wearing our to church on Sunday, Friday, and Holy Days, etc. How embarrased if we forgot our cover; she would put something, usually a Klenex secured with a bobby pin on our head, just to save face that we were covered.
Raised on the fear of God for punishment for such things in a Catholic upbringing in some small way gives a view into what an overwhelming world of responsibility it must be to try raising young women in Turkey or any Muslim country. The community alone made you feel inadequate on many levels by not being good enough, or sufficently remorseful for every inadequace, but to have a government shadowing your every move, cries out the questioning of your very existance. Bravo to you Mona, for If not now, when? If not us, Who?

God made the command for women (and men, don't forget) to cover up since the time of Adam and Eve. Women are to cover up to preserve their beauty and their dignity. A common misconception is men are free to do wahtever and the rules only apply to women and they are thus, "opressed" by it.

Men are also assigned rules including not being allowed to wear shorts above knees and other rules.

The mistake we make as people is we "assume" what God wants all the time, which is seen moreso in Christianity than other religions where people blindly assume an all forgiving god w/ no consequence and plenty of self-interpretation of things w/o consulting knowledgeable religious scholars.

The best rule is what Turkey now has, the right for women to choose whether or not they want to wear hijabs. One shouldn't prevent people from their religion over that or force them into religion.

ps: Saudi Arabia has its flaws, however, the standard for islam has to be somewhat higher since The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), commanded that the Arabian peninsula should be a citadel for islam. So naturally, the rules are a little stricter in Saudi Arabia and should be. Enforcement, however, is another issue. Women shouldn't be beaten over some hair showing and the incident w/ the fire, that is an obvious anomoly and probably wouldn't happen every single time. They're not that crazy there to let women burn to death and die b/c their heads aren't covered.

In the end, I wish nothing but peace among all humanity and religions. The worst fear I have is when different groups will think that everyone else is always wrong and they are always right. This thinking creates arrogance which then creates conflict.

There is a quote in the Quran that says, "What may feel good, may be bad. What may be feel bad, may be good. Though you may not knoweth, God knoweth"

and that is the best statement I can use to explain why we do much of what we do as Muslims.

Maria,
I hope the following will answer your question on the headscarf.
IT IS NOT THE VIEL BUT IT"S THENCONTEXT:

The veil issue is simple: Hijab including the head cover for Muslim women is a STATEMENT of Modesty and Piety and according to a majority of Islamic scholars is prescribed by the Koran; therefore the Hijab was not meant as a separate cultural identity or as a politicla statement-in the first place-but seen and erroneously interpreted in the west in contrast to and within the new cultural context of Western societies to which the Muslims immigrated looking for freedom and opportunity.

It follows therefore that Hijab should be seen in its original context of Modesty and Piety and can reflect-like so many other cultures-a certain cultural diversity but not at all a sign of separation or oppression. Modesty is an Islamic code of behavior and the Hijab is only one outward manifestation of that Modesty. As the ancient Greeks said “In diversity there is unity.”

Niqab-fully covering the face-is not Islamic at all in any way, shape or form and so is the Burqo-the trade mark of the Taliban rule in Afghanistan and only in such a case is a sign of extremism, narrow-mindedness and repression of Muslim women. Am asking those who wear or demand the wearing of the Niqab or the Burqo to show us any Quranic or Prophetic injunction or proof that the Niqab is Islamic. I have never read or heard that a single Muslim woman is reported to have put on a Niqab or Burqo during the era of the Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) which is the example par excellence for Muslims to emulate.

Am not contesting the right and freedom of Muslim women to wear Niqab or Burqo but am rather contesting that it has nothing to do with Islam-just as much as I don't contest the right of any western woman to wear a mini skirt or a swim suit. However, if western women have the right to wear such clothes, then why do not their Muslim sisters have the same right and personal choice to wear Hijab. Many Muslim women refer to Mary, the mother of Jesus and her head cover as an example of Modesty and Piety to be emulated; Mary being a revered figure in the Koran and the only female to be specifically addressed by her name and where a whole chapter of the Koran is dedicated to and in her name as well as the virgin birth which Muslims believe in.

As a human being of the Muslim faith, I would find it unnatural and quite awkward to communicate with a Muslim woman wearing Niqab or Burqo; the human face is a God-given natural medium of communication-that simple. I really wonder where and how this practice of wearing the Niqab came about-extremely very few Muslim women wear it even in Muslim countries any way. Muslim women during the ages communicated with men in public and with society at large, directly and with their faces uncovered, and for God's sake what is there to cover in a face-it's just a face and it really makes it easier and human to communicate with the Hijab-face uncovered- but not with the Niqab or Burqo-face completely covered; Niqab is an unnecessary self-imposed burden and an impediment to natural human communications. The absence of Niqab does not and should not in any way compromise the modesty or piety of a Muslim woman; Islam emphasizes modest behavior and a modest code of dress as part of that behavior, clearly to the exclusion of Niqab and Burqo.

It’s a popular misconception in the West-especially by lslam haters and bashers-that Muslim women are forced to wear Hijab and therefore it’s a sign of repression. Generally, pious Muslim women wear the Hijab happily and willingly; of course there are a lot of pious Muslim women who dress modestly but don’t wear the head cover. Muslim women should not be forced to wear Hijab or head cover but also they should not be forced to remove it. One can understand but not condone at all that Muslim countries such as Turkey –since the days of it’s dictator/founder Ataturk- and Tunisia under its present tyrant and dictator who turned into a police state, also force women to remove their head cover because these are essentially repressive military dictatorships and are not different from those who force women to wear Niqab and Burqo; but one can never understand or condone why a genuine democracy such as France force Muslim women to remove their head cover which is an infringement upon their personal choice, individual and religious freedom guaranteed by French law. By the same token, would France force French women to cover up on the beaches of the Rivera and if not why?

In principle, therefore, those who impose Niqab and Burqo on Muslim women and those who force them to remove Hijab are equally repressive.

However, Muslims living in West need to be sensitive to the culture and values of their new homelands as Westerners do when they are in Muslim countries; Muslims need to and can integrate into their new societies while being true to their Islamic faith: Islam has that much built-in flexibility and adaptability and for over fourteen centuries proved it’s universality across all major world cultures.

There is so much to be learned form 800 years of multi-cultural, multi-religious, peaceful co-existence between Muslims, Christians and Jews in Spain in such a unique human and cultural synergy resulting in a brilliant contribution to human civilization until it was destroyed by the Catholic Church thru the imposing of the brutal Inquisition on both Muslims and Jews in 1492.

Moreover, Western societies need also to accept Muslims as full fledged-citizens and partners and as an integral part of a multicultural diversity-again, there is human unity in diversity- and not to try and re-invent new western ISLAM in the image of the west; after all for Muslims to be Muslims, they have to be true to their faith. Bashing of Muslims on every occasion by western media, Xenophobia, predijuice, racism and especially stereotyping of Islam and Muslims, linking Islam and Muslims to violence and terrorism should end once and for all as its unfair, counterproductive and creates a siege mentality among Muslims and hinders their integration into western societies-as the case was the jews in midieval Europe.

Such practices not only offend Muslims but it also inflicts untold pain and agony on them.

Dear Mona,

Religions were meant to liberate humanity and not shackle them. All religions stress the need to behave in a righteous manner in dealing with others and setting a good example for others and for future generations. However, human interpretation of religions brought us so many rules and laws that were devised to work for specific reasons and dating back to the dark ages. It is wrong to tie such rules to religion. The head scarf will not deter a man from lusting over a woman, for the problem lies within the man and his behavior.

There is absolutely no reason to treat women in such a manner and there should be no rule that applies to man that doesn't apply to a woman. If man had to wear a headscarf everyday, headscarf wearing would be banned. Noneth