An excerpt from the above linked-to article by Harane Karimi follows:
========== == =
In Nice, less than a month after the Bastille Day attack on the Promenade des Anglais, which killed 86 people and was claimed by the Islamic State group, something quite odd happened. The city mayor, like mayors in many other towns on the French Riviera, issued an order to ban the wearing of burkinis. This decree targets a piece of non-revealing swimwear worn by some Muslim women when they go to the beach.
The Organisation Against Islamophobia in France and the Human Rights League have both deemed this decree to be discriminatory and oppressive, and have brought a case before the Administrative Court of Nice to have it annulled.
They did not succeed in this attempt, and the Administrative Court decided to ban, once again, the burkini from the beach at Cannes and Villeneuve-Loubet, on 13 August and 22 August respectively, explaining that “it was necessary, logical and commensurate” given the post-attack climate prevailing in the region.
= == ==========
My online response to the above link-to article follows:
*I deleted the original of this post when CD wouldn’t allow me to edit it. For those who did [read that original post], Regarding that post: Pardon the typos. It’s hard as heck to write up a decent post on a smartphone. Editing is sometimes all but impossible. And of course, doing links and quotations is not possible. At least not for me.
Harane Karimi’s report is welcome, but I reject the use of the word ‘Islamophobia’ to refer to hostility toward Muslims. Fear (which you can’t argue with, even if you can discuss it) is not hostility. What Hanane looks at here is clearly hostility. Any existing fear would entail a different, and I think interesting, discussion.
I’m religious and leftwing, but that doesn’t mean that I share beliefs 100% with other leftists. Probably most leftists reject God and then probably a lot of those ones are hostile toward my position. Here in Canada, so far, It’s my ‘position’ that many of my supposedly pro human rights fellow leftists are hostile to. I realize that that could change, under the right circumstances. It could advance to hostility toward my person, much like prejudice advances to discrimination and worse.
There’s still a lot of people here who identify as religious and Christian. Where they’re Christian, they are hostile to my position, owing to our disagreement about the quality of their Christianity. When push comes to shove, Will the anti-people state allow those ones to express openly their hostility toward me? The state, which has been attracting maladjusted types for years (just read history) doesn’t care about human rights while increasingly it cares about religious freedom in a negative way. The Christian Right has helped fascism to grow and spread (Chris Hedges writes about it) precisely because there are those politicians who need fringe people to vote for them or risk being ignored by the un-ruined (intellectually, spiritually) segment of society. They have embraced neoconservatism and it’s ideas, including the idea that religion and the devout can be manipulated and used.
It’s the same in the Muslim world. In fact, The same political forces sometimes work together to manipulate various religious groups for the same (often ‘great game’) purpose. Christian Zionists would be one example. Another would be the coddling of Muslim Fethullah Gulen by the CIA (largely through the Clintons [http://bit.ly/2bQXH2j] and keys players like Graham Fuller) whose extensive network of (really crappy) charter schools in the US has the geopolitical goal of funding a movement that the US can use and which, because it is Muslim, can be used to influence regions (greater middle east) where the US wants to bring governments, and duped citizenry, around to a pro US, anti-Russian and anti-Chinese orientation. Violence and the trampling of human rights are no impediment to the national security, or police, state, as the recent coup attempt in Turkey, with Fethullah’s organization in the background, shows. (Sibel Edmonds explains how the Clintons shut down multiple US criminal investigations into the Gulen movement, moving them to counterintelligence to put them out of the reach of the courts, indicating that the US had plans for Gulen and his huge network. And as F. William Engdhal noted, Even after the seedy Fethullah was pardoned by the Turkish authorities [in] 2006, he remained in the US, which caught observers’ eyes. He is being used by the CIA. – http://bit.ly/2bYr5iY1. See the excellent documentary titled “Killing Ed – Charter Schools, Corruption, And The Gulen Movement,” by Mark S. Hall. The documentary was wrapped up, apparently, just as the failed Turkish coup was about to start or was underway. As for Sibel Edmonds info, See her Boiling Frogs website) And now I’m seeing reports about Putin’s use of the soft (political) power of the Orthodox church to bring people around to having a pro Russian influence (http://bit.ly/2bYru5j).
This is why God calls organized, global religion a harlot. She’s supposed to be in a marriage relationship to God (figuratively speaking), but there she is prostituting herself to the kings of this world, to this godless, gangster corporatocracy, rather than showing loyalty to God by directing people (properly) to him, as he requires of those who are his people. And that unholy, mutually beneficial dalliance won’t last. Her paramours are about to betray her and turn on her, as the Christian Bible (looking at it not through the eyes of those unguided by holy spirit) states. The kings betray her, which means that the secular authorities turn on her, which means that much of the zombie population will turn on her.
Different actors will have different motivations. For example, Religionists who are not actually guided by God – and aren’t reasonable, rational and non-threatening – will invite trouble from people who won’t have the sort of constraints that a proper moral compass would give them.