My response to this guy was too long to be posted in the comments section, hence I took this as an opportunity to defend a very highly insulting and unjust accusation against a religion.
Now this guy here says:
"The neurotic need that some women have to walk everywhere in disguise"
Neurotic? This is not a neurotic need-- but a human being practising his right to follow his religion the way he wants to. If non-Muslims in Europe are following their religion by not covering their bodies modestly (even though they are required to as per the Bible), is this neurotic? Or is it neurotic that someone feels threatened by modesty? By a piece of cloth? By a religion because -some- followers practise reilgion in the wrong way?. Categorizing every Muslim as a terrorist is quite laughably highly unwise and plain gullible. Is it neurotic of a woman to cover her body lest she be raped/teased/hooted at/judged based on the size of her butt? Is she wrong to not wanting to conform to the masses that focus on the sole element of beauty of a woman? Is it neurotic to be safe rather sorry? The answer is quite clear.
As the video sluggishly progresses, we see that Pat Condell makes numerous attempts to insult the burqa in a very childish manner. We can see that this hatred for burqa comes from hating the religion itself-- thus deeming him a racist and rightly so. Racist, hateful and abusive. He mentions there being no proof that the Qur'an deems Burqa mandatory. What he fails to realize is that "burqa" is the Afghan/Persian word for their traditional garment, and not the Islamic dress-code, hence this whole accusation of for/against burqa is ineligible. Let us say that we allow him the margin for his ignorance of Islamic terms and accept the fact that he meant Hijab or the Islamic dress-code for women, there is clear evidence within the Qur'an that Hijab is mandatory on all believing women.
From the Qur'an, In the name of Allah the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful, :
Surah Nur, Verse 31
"And say to the faithful women to lower their gazes, and to guard their
private parts, and not to display their beauty except what is apparent of it,
and to extend their headcoverings (khimars) to cover their bosoms (jaybs), and
not to display their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their
husband's fathers, or their sons, or their husband's sons, or their brothers, or
their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their womenfolk, or what their
right hands rule (slaves), or the followers from the men who do not feel sexual
desire, or the small children to whom the nakedness of women is not apparent,
and not to strike their feet (on the ground) so as to make known what they hide
of their adornments...."
and Surah Ahzab, Verse 59
"O Prophet(pbuh)!Say to your wives and your daughters and the women of the faithful to draw their outergarments (jilbabs) close around themselves; that is better that they will be recognized and not annoyed. And God is ever Forgiving, Gentle."
He further says that modesty is not by dressing up in a mobile tent, further attracting attention, as per a "culture" that they despise yet follow. Culture eh? This is religion. Know the difference. Arab Muslims (some of them) follow the Hijab, Arab Christians don't. End of story. Also, yes, modesty is to attract attention by dressing up in barely there clothes or skin-fitting jeans, and by being judged on the size of someone's back. Way to go Pat.
He says the best reason to ban the burqa for him would be because it offends the Islamists. Clearly, he despises a certain creed of people, in this case, them being Muslims. Any more proof needed? It's coming-- keep reading.
Before that, I won't even bother with all the insults he's hurling at the burqa itself, calling them mantles of misery, dehumanizing and cloaks of deaths, and asking banks, public transport, and places as such to refuse entry/services to burqa-ed women. Uh, dehumanising anyone? Usurping of rights anyone?
He goes on to say that it's a political statement. Good God-- isn't the Media, France/YOU making it a political statement? This is not Afghanistan in question, where we may accuse Taliban of enforcing women in these outfits. This is the burqa in general we're questioning-- that too in France! Religious freedom is the basic right-- and with the propaganda of it being a security threat, it's being made into a political statement, even though it largely remains a personal choice for the literal, practising Muslims. How is it the pre 9/11 no one cared who wore what besides, probably, Britney Spear's wardrobe ofcourse? How is it that post 9/11 after the propaganda that Muslims were behind the attacks of the WTC, suddenly we became the terrorists? How is it that women in Europe/America/Afghanistan/Saudi were not even shed light upon based on a garment they wore in their everyday life? Why now? Because the Taliban enforced it in ONE country, the whole Muslim world becomes that way? Ignorant. Highly ignorant.
He goes on babbling about how women in Islam have no rights and that the feminists are not speaking out on this issue of encasing women in Burqas. Uh, exactly! They're not speaking out because they KNOW that this is an issue of women CHOOSING their outfit, and not OTHERS choosing it for them. He goes on ranting about how women in burqas and feminists who support this should be ashamed of themselves because their daughters are going to suffer for this. Right-- because we all want our daughters to be leered at and groped at and be checked out and married SOLELY for how beautiful they are, isn't it Pat? I would be ashamed to have a father like you. Tsk tsk. A racist, ignorant fool. Need proof?
Also-- women in Islam? Rights? I have a whole another post for that coming RIGHT UP.
What I just seemed to have realized is that Pat Condell makes false accusations that have absolutely no element of strength or truth in them, and that they are weak and empty and meaningless, except strongly portraying him as an ignorant member of a society, sadly enough, and portraying his hate of the religion of Islam. Tsk tsk. 21st Century and we still have people hating each other and intolerant attitudes towards other creeds/races/religions.
Following what Sami Zataari has to say in response to Pat Condell's video, I say that man has totally owned Pat Condell. It's obvious and clear and something that clearly shows who's right and who's wrong.
Does any woman in a Burka rape someone? Stab someone? Mug someone? Spit on the face of someone belonging to another religion? Has anyone looked into the life of a Niqabi? A Hijabi? Let me give you a few links myself!
Digital Niqabi, I Love Hisham: Pixie/Beautiful Muslimah, etc etc! There are so mnay! Every bothered googling? Ever bothered even broadening your horizons and talking to a Niqabi? How many times have you come across a woman hiding a freakin' bomb in her burqa? I mean come on! For the love of God. It's one thing to joke about it, and another thing to completely believe a joke to be true, I mean how gullible do you have to be in order to believe this to be true? How many Muslim women are part of gang culture, gun crimes, knife crimes, rape, drug-addiction, smoking, alcoholism, sex-offenders, etc etc? How many? NONE! ZERO! ZILCH! Maybe a few, tiny numbers in smoking, but none in the others!
It's Islamophobia, and hatred. That's what it is.
P.S. A big thanks to my friend Shella who informed me about this video.