hypochondriac

Well that's very interesting. I agree 100%.

Are you suggesting that you know corbyn better than Margaret Hodge and Ian Austin? The only thing I said was that some people who know corbyn better than we do are of the opinion that he is anti semetic which is factually accurate. Whether he is or not I have no idea but as I said earlier, I don't think anyone on this thread has said he is personally an anti semite.

I'm failing to see the relevance of that to my post.

My initial statement was neither silly nor over the top. You really should just accept that you misunderstood what I said and assumed I said all Muslim women when I said nothing of the sort. So that bit was wrong and the bit about the five sources was wrong too. Let's move on now that you've been thoroughly debunked.

And nowhere in your quote have I suggested that all women who wear the niqab burka and hijab have been forced to do so. I accept your apology. And it was five examples from five separate news sources. I won't be going back and linking you to each one though because as I said earlier you aren't actually interested in them and you've been proven wrong enough for one evening.

I'm not sure anyone on this thread has said that Jeremy Corbyn has been personally anti semetic- although people who know him better than any of us believe that he is. He's definitely been complete rubbish at ha doling the issue within the party though and incredibly slow to act which has just made the whole thing worse.

I'll take that as an apology and an admission that you failed to understand my post then. As you are fully aware, that was only five or six examples but there are many more that I could easily post onto here but you're clearly not actually interested in examples. My claim has always been that there are pressures on some women to wear the niqab and that it is a hated garment in much of the world by many who view it as a symbol of oppression. If you decide to read into my posts things that do not exist then that's not my problem.

I have done no such thing. You've clearly failed to understand what I've said. Given your history my guess is that it was a wilful misunderstanding but I'm happy to accept that you just made a mistake.

And I already told you that I accept that there are women who choose to wear the coverings so I don't understand what your point is. I told you there were women in the UK and elsewhere who are forced or pressured into wearing them, I knew you knew that to be the case. You goaded me into posting sources and when I found multiple sources showing that this was the case your response is that you can find sources that show that some women choose to wear them- a claim I never disagreed with.

Sadly not. From about five different sources so not just one perspective.

If we really have to go through this tiresome exercise of dredging up quotes that you know exist regarding this issue: Dr Qanta Ahmed, a British-American Muslim doctor who lives in New York, does not wear a face veil and supports a ban on them. She said the number of women wearing them in the West is increasing in part because girls begin to wear them before they reach puberty and many were not given a choice. Those who defend the right of women to wear the niqab under the banner of religious freedom gloss over the fact that this “freedom” is often dictated by social pressure I was raised as an observant Muslim in a British family. Women, I was taught, determine their own conduct — including their ‘veiling’. We’d cover our hair only if we freely chose to do so. That’s why I’m baffled by the notion that all good Muslim women should cover their hair or face. My entire family are puzzled by it too, as are millions like us. Not until recent years has the idea taken root that Muslim women are obliged by their faith to wear a veil. It’s a sign, I think, not of assertive Islam, but of what happens when Islamists are tolerated by a western culture that’s absurdly anxious to avoid offence. This strange, unwitting collaboration between liberals and extremists has been going on for years. But at last there are signs that it is ending. Rigid interpretations of the veil are a recent invention. They’re derived not from the Quran or early Islamic tradition but from a misogyny which claims a false basis in the divine. So when the ECJ supports employers who ban the hijab, it is categorically not impinging on anyone’s religious freedom. The veil has more to do with a set of quite new cultural mores. The Islamists wish to say: we Muslims are different from the West. Increasingly, we don’t look like you, or act like you. For Muslim families who have lived in Europe for generations, this is a strange and ugly trend. The men and women agitating for the right to wear headscarves in Europe would do well to remember our own history in the Muslim world. A MUSLIM who subjected his battered wife to a year of “hell” after he terrorised her into wearing a veil has been jailed. Is that enough examples to satisfy you? I doubt it.

I never denied there were not some who choose to do so. I said there were many who face unreasonable pressures to wear them which is undoubtedly the case. This is what is unacceptable and combined with the very obvious barrier it creates for integration in a western society is why it is not something I want to see in a Liberal society.

Are you saying you don't think there are cases in this country of women being pressured to wear them? Because I know you know that it exists and that I could easily find quotes to back that up. Of course that's not every woman but you may also question how freely someone has made that choice when it's been drummed into them from a very young age. Let's also remember other countries around the world such as Iran and Saudi Arabia where it is a hated symbol of oppression and subjugation. I don't like using personal experience because that can be unreliable but I am thankful that my Arabic father in law prioritised his children's happiness and was relatively liberal. Sadly that was not the case for my wife's cousins who have had to wear face coverings, are forbidden from conversing with males outside of their family on most occasions and one was forbidden from marrying who she wanted to by her family and she's now almost 40 and faces the prospect of being alone with no children. I expect if you asked her she would say it was her choice as well...

I almost wish we sign ings now and he's a massive success just to stop your childish whining.

I think the niqab and burqa do a very effective job of 'othering' all by themselves. It's one of many reasons why they should be discouraged. I think Johnson is a buffoon as I already said but I think all the screeching from the left because he said they look ridiculous is pathetic quite frankly. They do look ridiculous and I oppose any system that requires people to cover their entire face up in public simply because they are female, even more so when many Muslims say it has nothing to do with Islam and is in fact a relatively recent phenomenon. You realise that you're on the side of Salafists that use their hard line system to subjugate women? So either it's very offensive as you claimed earlier or it's just some colourful political language that could potentially lead to violence in the streets. Which one are you going for?

Sorry I should have made it clear that that was a quote from the article. It wasn't me saying it was nothing to do with Islam, it was the Muslim woman. I think as a Muslim her opinion on the matter is going to hold a bit more weight... Also absolute lol at offensive. If anyone actually found a couple of Un pc comments from a buffoon like Johnson offensive- the kind he has made throughout his career- then they really need to rethink some things about their life.

Tbf you would have dismissed any similar sort of predictions last year as "overly negative ballocks" and it was probably our worst season performance wise since our relegation to league one so it's not particularly surprising that some people would hold that opinion m

What's interesting is that supposedly the niqab actually has nothing at all to do with Islam and in many cases is a rather recent phenomenon. I understand the argument for letting people wear what they want but it is interesting that supposedly Muslim countries like Turkey are banning it in public too.

If that's the end of our window then I'd give us a 5/10 considering how weak we were at the start of it. As someone else has said, it's possible that our failure to shift some of our rubbish has prevented us from bringing in any more quality.

I agree with a lot of what you said. Virtually none of that had anything to do with what I posted though. Curious to know what "facts" I've got wrong there? Most of what you posted was an opinion...

Very interesting that Johnson is accused of a nonsense word like Islamaphobia when the niqab has nothing do with Islam: When Boris Johnson mocks the niqab, he is emphatically not mocking Muslim women because – and this is a point that we Muslims seem to be unable to get across to non-Muslims – there is no basis in Islam for the niqab. Claiming otherwise is a profound distortion of Islamic belief. That’s why*Muslim nations are themselves regulating and banning the niqab and burqa*– as in both Morocco and Turkey where these coverings are seen as an invasion of Salafist affinities and a risk to national security and societal integrity

And another very interesting article from the Spectator:

Depends what sentiment you mean. It's undoubtedly been used to try to shut down any sort of criticism of Islam. It's not something that was being widely used for this purpose until a few years ago. It's not even technically correct since a phobia is an irrational fear and there's certainly perfectly rational reasons to be fearful or at the very least hugely critical of many parts of the Islamic world as you are fully aware.

Stop following me around the board soggy.

If we use the money to get in an attacking player then fair enough.