Veil costs her claim in court | Detroit Free Press

Judge: Face key in deciding truth
October 22, 2006
BY ZACHARY GORCHOW
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
Ginnnah Muhammad of Detroit was looking for her day in court.
Instead, she said she felt as if a judge forced her to choose between her case and her religion in a small-claims dispute in Hamtramck District Court.
A devout Muslim, she wore a niqab — a scarf and veil to cover her face and head except for her eyes — Oct. 11 as she contested a rental car company’s charging her $2,750 to repair a vehicle after thieves broke into it.
Judge Paul Paruk said he needed to see her face to judge her truthfulness and gave Muhammad, 42, a choice: take off the veil when testifying or the case would be dismissed. She kept the veil on.

“I just feel so sad,” Muhammad said last week. “I feel that the court is there for justice for us. I didn’t feel like the court recognized me as a person that needed justice. I just feel I can’t trust the court.”
The wearing of a niqab has spurred increasing debate, particularly in Europe. In 2004, France banned the wearing of it and other religious symbols in public schools.
This month, former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, still a member of parliament, ignited a fierce debate over the niqab by suggesting that Muslim women in his district remove their veils when they visit his office. He said it would improve communication, calling the veil “a visible statement of separation and of difference.”
It has sparked controversy in the United States as well. A Muslim woman from Florida unsuccessfully went to court in an effort to overturn the state’s order in 2001 that she reveal her face for her driver’s license photo.
In metro Detroit, which has one of the country’s largest Muslim populations, a small minority of Muslim women — primarily those of Yemeni descent — wear the niqab, said Dawud Walid, executive director of the Michigan branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Paruk said that as a fact finder, he needs to see the face of a person testifying. Michigan has no rules governing what judges can do regarding religious attire of people in court, so the judges have leeway on how to run their courtrooms.
“My job in the courtroom is to make a determination as to the veracity of somebody’s claim,” he said. “Part of that, you need to identify the witness and you need to look at the witness and watch how they testify.”
Paruk said he offered to let Muhammad, who was born in the United States and converted to Islam at the age of 10, wear the veil during the proceedings except when she testified. He said this was the first time someone had come before his court wearing a niqab, and he noted that many Muslims do not consider it a religious symbol.
“I felt I was trying to accommodate her as best I could,” he said.
Walid said Paruk still violated Muhammad’s civil rights.
“Although a niqab is donned by a minority of Muslim females, it is still a bona fide religious practice,” he said.
Hamtramck, once almost entirely populated by residents of eastern European descent, now has a large and growing population of Muslims.
“There definitely needs to be greater sensitivity toward the growing populace in that municipality,” Walid said.
Judges should seek to strike a balance between running their courtrooms and respecting the religious views of those appearing before them, said Steve Leben, a Kansas trial court judge who is president of the American Judges Association.
“I’m not trying to be critical of the judge because it is difficult to make decisions on the fly,” Leben said. “But if it’s a person’s legitimate religious belief, we have a duty to try to reconcile these competing interests.”
Mark Somers, chief judge of the Dearborn District Court, which covers the bulk of the Detroit area’s Muslim population, said he could not recall an instance when a woman who wore a niqab came before his court to testify.
But he said he would not require a woman to remove her veil during a civil case.
“To me, it would not be an issue,” he said. “I simply as a matter of personal policy would never ask someone to do that.”

138 thoughts on “Veil costs her claim in court | Detroit Free Press

  1. Very strange.
    Since when are cases being decided based upon how truthful a face seem.
    I thought normal judges decide their cases based on the evidence.

  2. Yes but part of the evidence is how the witness acts when they say something. Such as common signs of deceit such as looking away, change in expression during a lie etc. I’m not saying Paruk was right or wrong. There is no rule regarding it and it appears he was trying to accomodate her the best he could. Perhaps there should be uniform standards through Michigan, as you can see the Dearborn District Judge would not have her remove the veil.

  3. I agree with Tom’s assessment of why a Judge might need to see the plantiff’s face during testimony. Cases are not only decided on evidence but the crediblity of testimony, which may include interpretation of facial expressions.

    One of the foundations of our legal system is that we’re all equal under the law. If we let one person hide their face during a case, we’d have to allow it for everyone, which would create a difficult situation.

    I disagree with uniform standards. Judical independence is very important to the balance of power.

    Currently, it’s left to the Judge’s discretion how he (or she) runs their court. Using the legislative branch to take authority away from the Courts is dangerous. It threatens judicial independance, which threatens the balance of power.

  4. This is interesting. I can’t say that I disagree with anything said here, but some folks can look you right in the eye while picking your pocket and others have a hard time making eye contact just asking for directions. Then you have all these cultural differences in the concepts of modesty and perhaps even facial expressions. It’s a strange suggestion but maybe it would even be more fair if everybody had to testify from behind a veil. But whatever the details I agree that it should be the Judge’s decision.

  5. Thank You, Judge Paruk, for standing your ground. That woman needs to go and live in an Islamic Land if she wants to parade about in such a ridiculous and oppressive costume! Hey – go live in Yemen, you hypocrite! Go live in Syria and get your justice with your veil on but NOT IN AMERICA! We are not going to be PC kowtowing to you Barbarians like the poor English and French and Italians whose countries are being destroyed by the Muslim Invasion.

    You Go, Judge Paruk!

  6. SORRY ,BUT I HAVE TO AGREE WITH THE COMMENT ABOUT JUDGE PARUK STANDING HIS GROUND. WE HAVE ALREADY CHANGED LAWS TO ALLOW WOMEN TO SWIM WITH CLOTHING ON IN DEARBORN. IF THE MUSLIMS WANT TO LIVE IN OUR COUNTRY THEN THEY SHOULD HAVE TO ABIDE BY OUR RULES. THIS GOES FOR ANYONE LIVING HERE.rrrr

  7. I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW HOW MANY OF THE NEGATIVE COMMENTS HERE TOWARDS JUDGE PURAK ARE FROM MUSLIMS!!!!!!

  8. In 1907 the swimmer Annette Kellerman from Australia visited the United States as an “underwater ballerina”, a version of synchronized swimming involving diving into glass tanks. She was arrested for indecent exposure because her swimsuit showed arms, legs and the neck. Kellerman changed the suit to have long arms and legs and a collar, still keeping the close fit that revealed the shapes underneath. — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swimsuit

  9. I TAKE BACK MY COMMENT THAT THERE WERE NEGATIVE THINGS SAID ABOUT THE JUDGE,BUT I THINK I HAVE TO COMMEND THE PERSON WHO SAYS THOSE WHO ARE TRYING TO MAKE DRASTIC CHANGES IN OUR COUNTRY ,LIKE MOST MUSLIMS, WHO ARE NOT WILLING TO CONFORM TO OUR WAYS SHOULD RETURN TO THEIR HOMELANDS.PRACTICING THEIR CUSTOMS IN THEIR HOMES IS FINE,BUT THEY NEED TO KEEP IT AT THAT.THESE WOMEN WANT TO USE ALL OF OUR FREEDOMS,BUT DON’T WANT TO COMFORM TO OUR WAYS.

  10. Tonight on Fox News the judge in question stated that the reason he required the woman to remove her veil was that the accused (the car rental company) had the right to see their accuser. So which is it? (That reason is so flimsy that I decided to google the news story online… hence my appearence here!)

    We are talking about small claims court. My understanding is that there is more leeway and therefore the judge’s need to evaluate the case based on testimony may be strong. Fine. But I don’t think the answer to this problem is to force the woman into a corner: (in her perspective) disrobe, or automatically lose your case. That’s not at all an accomodating response!

    For all the posters who are supporting the judge simply because they don’t like those “barbarians”: basing your decisions on whether or not the situation punishes entire groups of people you personally have struck off your approval list is sad, sad, sad.

  11. SORRY YOU ARE MISSING MY POINT!NO ONE SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN A COURT ROOM WITH THEIR FACE COVERED. IT ISN’T A RACIAL THING AS NOT LETTING SOMEONE WEAR A BATHING SUIT IN A POOL ISN’T A RACIAL THING

  12. Oh and I see a post that was not there while I composed mine.

    Sue: You say that Muslim women should not be allowed to visibly practice their faith outside of their homes. I wonder who else this rule would apply to. Would you likewise stop Hindus, or Jews, etc., from being visibly Hindu or Jew? No visible cultural expressions but American, hmm? Oh crap, there goes the entire town of Frankenmuth!

    Also I would like to know what exactly “our ways” are. Because I’m as Western as they come yet I don’t know if I even I wish to conform to your personal rulebook of what it means to be American. I thought one of my fundamental rights was to speech and expression…

  13. UNFORTUNATELY WHEN WE CHANGE LAWS TO ACCOMODATE OTHERS RELIGIOS CUSTOMS IT CAN CAUSE PEOPLE TO BECOME BITTER TOWARDS THEM,ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE BEEN ABIDING BY THEM FOR YEARS.

  14. NOT WHEN IT CHANGES OUR LAWS.WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO BE HERE IF YOU DIDN’T WANT TO LIVE THE AMERICAN DREAM

  15. FRANKENMUTH….THE GERMANS FOUGHT FOR US IN THE CIVIL WAR…..NOT AGAINST US. IT IS A FESTIVAL TOWN. THEY DON’T EXPRESS THEIR GERMAN CULTURE IN THEIR EVERYDAY LIFE.IT’S A WAY OF LIVING

  16. I’m with d.s. I don’t know what “our ways” even means. I imagine the American Dream means different things for different people.

    To me it’s people exercising their First Amendment rights to freedom of religion, speech, and expression, but that’s me.

    I think what Sue really means is “her ways”. Do the Amish conform to Sue’s narrow vision of who can be an American? Are they in persuit of her version of the American Dream?

  17. Sue: Ginnah was born here. Why shouldn’t she be free to wear whatever she wants, in or out of a pool? (A courtroom is another matter.)

    Many residents in Hamtramck only speak Polish. Should they also stop expressing their culture in their every day lives? No more Polish Mass, polka, and pierogi?

    My point was that the amount of clothes an American woman should wear when swimming has historically been an outfit with legs, arms, and a collar. In fact, women used to wear heavy dresses and undergarments with lead weights sewn in the hems to preserve their modesty:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Bathing_suit_1858.png
    and look at these contraptions:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathing_machine

  18. WHEN I SAY OUR WAYS I MEAN THE COUNTRY’S LAWS . I DID NOT MAKE THE LAWS,BUT WE ARE WILLING TO CHANGE LAWS THAT HAVE BEEN PROTECTING OUR SAFETY AND HEALTH,IE WEARING A BATHING SUIT TO SWIM IN . JUMANAH SAADEH STATED SHE WAS NOT ALLOWED IN THE POOL BECAUSE SHE WAS “MUSLIM”THAT IS NOT WHY SHE WAS ASKED TO LEAVE THE POOL.IT WAS BECAUSE WE HAVE LAWS IN OUR COUNTRY THAT PROHIBIT CERTAIN CLOTHING IN POOLS. THIS IS WHAT UPSETS ME.WHY SHOULD WE CHANGE LAWS THAT PROTECT US TO ALLOW OTHERS TO BE ABLE TO PRACTICE THEIR BELIEFS. WHY SHOULD OTHERS POSSIBLY SUFFER.

  19. FREEDOM OF SPEECH,RELIGION,AND EXPRESSION ARE ALL FINE AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT BREAKING ANY OF OUR WRITTEN LAWS,AND THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO.YOU NEED TO LIVE IN A COUNTRY WHERE YOUR CUSTOMS ARE ACCEPTED FULLY WITHOUT BREAKING A LAW.WEARING CLOTHING IN A SWIMMING POOL AND WEARING A MASK IN A COURTROOM ARE NOT ACCEPTED HERE!

  20. How does a woman in Washtenaw county wearing sweatpants in a pool threatening your safety?

    There are no laws that prohibit what people can wear in a pool. I think you’re confusing the Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation Commission’s policy on swimwear with law.

  21. OBVIOUSLY I AM DEALING WITH ONE CULTURE ON THIS BLOG….I THINK I WILL LOOK ON BLOOMFIELD HILLS BLOG .I’M SURE THERE ARE MORE AMERICANS THERE. I JUST SAW A PICTURE OF THE MUSLI9M,,,OOPS POLISH FESTIVAL ..

  22. Sue said, “FREEDOM OF SPEECH,RELIGION,AND EXPRESSION ARE ALL FINE AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT BREAKING ANY OF OUR WRITTEN LAWS…”

    Constitution says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

    It would seem that a ‘written law’ that was broken by freedom of speech or religion would be unconstitutional.

    Now the last time I was swimming was in Orchard Lake at midnight and I was naked. I did not get arrested. And yes, there was shrinkage.

    I am glad Judge Paruk did what he did, not because I agree with it. I’m glad the bus driver tried to get Rosa to move, not because I agree with it.

  23. NO IF YOU LIVE IN HAMTRAMCK AND YOU WERE POLISH…YOU HAVE TO BE MUSLIM NOW! BRENT THAT WAS DISGUSTING.STEVE ARE YOU EVEN AWARE OF THE SWIM SUIT ISSUE..I SUPPOSE IF YOU ARE ALSO MUSLIM YOU WOULD BE HAPPY WITH THIS ISSUE.

  24. HEY BRENT IT SURE LOOKS LIKE A LAW WAS WRITTEN TO ACCOMMODATE RELIGION IN WASHTENAM COUNTY….HOW SAD. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE MATERIALS DAMAGE THE FILTER SYSTEMS AND WE ARE SWIMMING IN UNCLEAN WATER..I WON’T GO SWIMMING THERE I KNOW THAT

  25. I’m still not sure what ruling in the 31st district court has to do with a swimming pool policy in Washtenaw county (except that both involve followers of Islam).

    The swimsuit policy doesn’t bother me at all. Permitting people to wear extra clothing in a pool to protect their idea of modesty doesn’t harm anyone.

    I’m sure the folks at the Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation can handle any filter emergency that may present itself.

    Sue, maybe your issue is more with Islam and not so much with women wearing niqab in court or a track suit in a public pool.

  26. Steve my issue is having to change laws to accomodate others for their religious preferences.I think it is wrong.I can have that opinion I think.

  27. But no laws have been changed. The only thing that changed was the swimsuit policy at a Washetnaw County Pool; allowing for people who wish to cover their bodies use of the pool. That wasn’t event he topic of the post. Sue, you hijacked the post and worked very hard at making the discussion about the Washtenaw pool’s policy. You then claim that laws are being changed which is false.

    As far as opinions, you can have any opinion that pleases you. You can believe the moon is made of cheese or the earth is flat. You’re correct, opinions held don’t have to be popular or supported by any kind of reasoning or fact. Of course, if you expect other people to discuss your opinions you’ll probably have to back them up with some kind of reasoning or fact. Fear doesn’t really pass muster in my book.

    The problem here is that you’ve gone to great lengths to personally attack commenters on this thread by suggesting that they are something less than American. If you’re trying to convince me/us that your opinion is reasonable, you have a long way to go.

  28. betty, if Americans hadn’t changed women would still be “arrested for indecent exposure because” their “swimsuit showed arms, legs and the neck.” America has never stopped changing, thank goodness.

  29. FINAL POST…I HAVE BETTER PLACES TO BE!!!!HOPEFULLY AMERICA WILL STOP CHANGING BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE, AND I REALLY DON’T THINK I HAVE ANY CONVINCING TO DO…..IT’S ALREADY DONE

  30. This is a good topic…What about the ordinance that was made for the muslims???? What I mean by that is the loud noise that comes out of their churches everyday???
    The council did make that for the Muslims which upset alot of people in this community and others across the country. I came here from Poland and I made changes the way I live here to how I lived in Poland. I did not demand law or ordinances to be made or changed for my religion.

  31. angel, the topic is that Judge Paruk dismissed a case because a woman chose to wear a niqab in court.

    As far as the Adhan, Al-Islah didn’t demand that ordinances be changed. The previous ordinance allowed the Adhan without modification. City council took it upon themselves to modify the ordinance. The same laws that allow church bells to play “silent night” allow Al-Islah to broadcast their adhan.

    I think it was a mistake to specifically name Christian church bells and the Islamic “call to prayer” in the ordinance because it inclines people like angel to believe it was a special law only for them.

  32. Sue, if America didn’t have the courage to challenge the status quo we’d still be living with Jim Crow, women wouldn’t be able to vote, and we’d still have troops in Viet Nam.

    I understand being afraid of things you don’t understand and realize that people need time to educate themselves with facts. Many people are uncomfortable with change, but that’s okay because it’s a normal reaction.

  33. No i do not believe that it is a special law for Christians. The bells also told people what time it was during the day. Why haven’t Detroit or Dearborn did the same like It is here??? Because it is just too much for people to be listening to a call of prayer in another language. And also the Muslims are not following the ordinance cause they di that after 10pm like instructed in the ordinance. Also alot of houses that Muslims own are doing that not just the churche sno more. And the reason I know this is that there are at least 3 house by me where this is happening.

    And I do agree with Judge Paruk. He has the right to ask that woman to take that off. Just as a police officer can ask them to remove the vail when they do a traffic stop. They should not be treated any different than anybody else here.

  34. “Walid said Paruk still violated Muhammad’s civil rights.”

    I’m not sure about this. The Civil Rights act of 1964 prohibits descriminiation. The point is to establish equality, not make exceptions. I think that Steven makes an excellent point about equality. “One of the foundations of our legal system is that we’re all equal under the law. If we let one person hide their face during a case, we’d have to allow it for everyone, which would create a difficult situation.”

    On another point that Walid made in the article above…

    “Although a niqab is donned by a minority of Muslim females, it is still a bona fide religious practice,” he said.

    I studied anthropology for several years. It is sometimes difficult to draw a line between cultural and religious practices. But, I think that the statement above does suggest that there is a line. It seems that her culture, not the Muslim religion, requires her to wear a niqab.

    I wonder if this made national news yet.

  35. I sure find all your “posts” amusing. I also can’t help but notice that no one seems to get as excited about cleaning the alley as they do posting on the computer. In my day we didn’t have all these electronic gizmos and doo-dads and the streets were cleaner and people were more friendly. I just wish the energy people put on expressing their electronic thoughts would be put into picking up after themselves, reading a book and talking to their neighbors.

  36. Where do you live Dottie? We’ve been all over the city but I don’t think I’ve met you yet.

    The people in our neighborhood don’t talk much about cleaning the alleys, they just do it. As you know it’s not very exciting work.

    On Saturday I cleaned the alley between Sobieski and Klinger from Commor up to Caniff and Hillary picked up litter on Sobieski between Carpenter and Caniff. I got two bags and I think she got four.

    I hope we’ll see you at the 4C’s cleanup on November 4th. Maybe we can be introduced.

  37. Dottie doesn’t know much about “electronic gizmos and doo-dads” but she seems to be able to use a anonymous web proxy just fine.

    Either that or she’s posting from Amsterdam.

    When someone told me that Dottie Grabowski was a made-up person, I didn’t want to believe them but I’m starting to think it was true.

  38. MABY THE JUDGE CAN MAKE ONE EXEMPTION…LET HER TESTIFY WITH HER OUTFIT ON, BUT ONLY ON HALLOWEEN!(HA,HA,HA)

  39. Can you go and get your Michigan Drivers License or State ID picture taken with your face covered? NO!!! Would you be comfortable working in a bank, and someone walking in with their face covered? NO!!!!! This is the USA!!!! It ran by the same policy for years and years…Now everyone is offended by everything…Get over it..

  40. On a different note, did anyone see what North Detroit General Hospital is turning into? A shell of a building!!! All the windows are missing and or broken, ceiling torn down…a shame…Probably Crack-head living quarters. What’s happening to this Great City?

  41. HMS-

    Please don’t ever say “on another note” within a thread. Seriously, take a second and find the Greater Detroit Hopsital thread.

  42. HMS-

    Regarding your comment on driver’s licenses…You are right.
    That issue was debated in Florida courts recently.
    http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/06/florida.license.veil/

    What I find very interesting is that in Muslim nations, women do not cover their faces in ID pictures.

    This brings me back to a point I brought up earlier. Islamic scholars agree with Paruk’s actions.

    Al-Dasooqi said: ” When testimony is given concerning a woman who wears niqaab (face-veil), she has to remove her niqaab. This applies in the case of marriage and other matters, such as selling, giving gifts, debts, power of attorney, and so on. This is the opinion favoured by our shaykh.” (Haashiyat al-Dasooqi ‘ala’l-Sharh al-Kabeer, 4/194).

    Shaykh al-Dardeer said: “It is not permitted to give testimony against a woman in niqaab until she uncovers her face so that it may be known who she is and what she looks like.” (Al-Sharh al-Kabeer li’l- Shaykh al-Dardeer, 4/194)

    and you can read more at
    http://www.niqabiparalegal.com/archives/2006/10/face_veils_in_c.php

  43. I don’t really have an opinion on the effectiveness of the church bells at telling time, because I’m perfectly happy relying on my own time keeping devices. But I have discovered that the church bells in Hamtramck are louder and ring far more frequently than the Call to Prayer, at least at my house, which makes them infinitely more annoying. If we’re going to have them, I think it’s only fair that we have both, but if I got to get rid of only one of them based solely on my personal whims, I know which one it’d be!

  44. To all the ignorant people making snide remarks about the Islamic faith, I am very disappointed in you. This country was founded on the principle of “Freedom.” Freedom of expression, which includes the freedom to wear whatever clothing you want whether it be for religious reasons or otherwise. For many moons this country prided itself on the ability for immigrants to come to this country and live a life free from persecution. I believe that a good amount of people have forgotten this ideal. As a native Hamtramckan I have always touted our diversity wherever I go, whether it was in Pennsylvania, Illinois, Wisconsin, or where I reside now in Florida. When others bash Muslims or “Those damn foreigners!” I let them know right away that I cannot relate because where I grew up, every region on this earth is represented in our little 2.2 mile slice of heaven. I let them know that as a result of growing up within this environment I am definitely more well-rounded. I let them know that I have great friends from Yemen, Iraq, China, Bosnia, Poland, and the list goes on. This makes me very happy inside that I have such a hands on knowledge with other cultures.
    We in this country seem to have this isolationist view of the world. Like we’re saying “We’re right, everybody else is wrong or these people all around the world need to be more like us.” I think this is most assuredly the wrong approach to view the world. What makes the US so special? Is it our health care system? Hmmm nope. Maybe it’s our education system. Damn! Nope again. I guess I’m getting off topic.
    The thing that makes this world so great is all of our differences. This is also what makes our country great. The fact that someone can come to this country and practice their religious beliefs in the manner that they choose. We have no right to force our will upon others for the sake of assimilation. Hitler forced people to assimilate and look what happened there. Sure I believe that people who come to this country should have at least some basic knowledge of english but there is no way that I will advocate for people to “Leave their national identity at the door.” This is a huge problem in the US right now. We have people claiming to be Polish-American or German-American for example, but when they hear someone at the grocery store speaking said language they either think to themselves or sometimes even say “You’re in America! Speak english!” This is the most hypocritical thing I have ever heard. Just remember that someone like you was probably saying that to your grandmother, or great grandmother.
    I say “This is America damn it! Let freedom reign!!!”

  45. They that can give up liberty for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety… – Ben Franklin

  46. I would not be suprised if Ginnnah Muhammad set up the “damage” to her to car, then try to sue for damages… I use to work in a collison shop in detroit.. i would see it every day some muslim arab try to pull a scam. since they would have some cousin in the insurance bussines that would help him with the scam and split the check….I would see muslim autobody repairman do extra damage to car before the insurance company adjester would come to inspect.. you know he was in on the deal too.. and just in case she not in a scam, STOP YOUR COMPLAINING, IF YOU WANT TO BE A MUSLIM AND PLAY IN YOUR SILLY CLOTHES, THEN GO OVERSEA TO YAMIN…OH YEAH, WOMEN CANT DRIVE THERE, SO YOU WONT HAVE TO WORRIE ABOUT YOUR CAR. AND WOMEN THERE ARE NOT ABLE TO SPEAK FREELY… JUST BE GLAD YOU HAVE THAT RIGHT HERE.

  47. Not only is she not an Arab, it’s not even her car. Vic’s comment is clear evidence that the root of racism is ignorance.

  48. joe-

    seriously. it’s not just the muslims. everyone falls into some kind of special interest group. think about the news we hear about our government catering to big business. think about a time when somebody wanted something from you just because they thought they were important. i remember bartending late one night at intermezzo and the illich family walked in and demanded that we reopen the kitchen. you know what they say about the squeaky wheel.

    i think that ginnah muhammed should have removed her veil. and i do not believe that her civil rights were violated.

    i’m really shocked and disgusted by the hateful remarks left by other readers. is there anyone out there who wants to talk about hijab culture or civil rights or facts – how about facts? am i alone here?

  49. BET YA MISSED ME!LOOKS LIKE THER ARE QUITE A FEW OTHERS THAT HAVE COMMENTS TO MAKE ON THE PRESENT ISSUE ON THIS BLOG THAT THINK ON THE SAME LINE THAT I DO….TA DA BELIEVE WHAT YOU WANT,THIS IS AMERICA AND WE WILL DO ALL WE CAN TO KEEP IT THAT.

  50. vic and others-

    too many lies and misconceptions!

    women can drive in yemen.

    yemeni women are free to speak in court.

    yemen has a president, a prime minister, a constitution, a bicameral legislative government, and even a woman minister, a woman ambassador, and women in parliament.

    ginnah muhammed is not from yemen. she is an american born muslim convert.

  51. squeeky wheel?, hell, every muslim is a squeeky wheel, go take a look at dearborn, what a hole in a ground that town is becoming. next thing you know they will want to sing the american anthem in arabic… and the one guy is right, they can scam the skin off a snake… and about yamin women can speak freely in court.(if their husband lets them out of the house to go to court.. yeah, then when they get home their husband who “own” them can beat the crap out of them. and NO, the women can’t speak freely in their homes. their are some yamin girls in dearborn that so-called “shamed” the family.. they were set to yamin and never see again (honor killing). yes, that the wonderfull world of muslims, beating your wife and killing your daughters… THANK GOD THAT AMERICANS HAS MORE CLASS THEN THEM, AND THAT IS WHY AMERICA IS THE BEST. WE WILL NEVER LOWER OUR SELF TO THEIR LEVEL.

  52. Nadine said: ginnah muhammed is not from yemen. she is an american born muslim convert.

    Sue, Vic, and joe aren’t interested in the facts of this case, they’re merely taking the opportunity to express their racist ideas.

    I’ve never been to a barbeque in Birmingham, MI or Canton, OH, but I can imagine the tenor of the conversation.

  53. steve those pictures were disgusting. if that is what you think i am like then now i really know what kind of a person you are.you are still not getting my beef.i am upset that we have to change laws(policies) or what ever you want to call them to accommodate foreigners in general.in america we say in god we trust. we used to be able to have christmas concerts,but now we have to have winter concerts.we used to be able to say to lords prayer at the beginning of the day in school…not any more.we gave that up because it offended others. we used to say the lords prayer at the beginning of a shift in the hospitals.nope can’t do that anymore either.you guessed it offended people.now we have to do these things hidden and on our own.i really don’t have a problem with what others do like i said in their own homes,or even in their own church,mosque,synagogue or what ever.but when we have to change things for others in public places that is where i become upset.

  54. THEY ARE NOT EXPRESSING RACIST IDEAS, THEY ARE JUST TELLING THE TRUTH….

    ALL MUSLIMS SCAM, I HAVE SEEN SO MANY MUSLIMS DURING CHRISTMAS SIGN THEIR KIDS UP FOR TOYS-FOR-TOTS AND OTHER GIVE-A-WAY SERVICES. THEY DON’T BELIEVE IN CHRISTMAS, BUT THEY CAN GET THEIR GREEDY HANDS ON ANY THING THEY CAN.

    GO TO FOCUS-HOPE AND SEE ALL MUSLIMS WITH THEIR 2006-07 VEHICELS AND WEARING 50 POUNDS OF GOLD, BUT SINCE THEY SCAM THE SYSTEM, THEY ARE TAKING ALL THEY CAN.

    THEY ALL HAVE SIX OR MORE KIDS, THAT WE PAY FOR, BECAUSE THEY SCAM WELFARE(FIA) AND ALL THE OTHER SERVICES.

    THERE IS A MUSLIM THAT LIVES IN DETROIT THAT IS ILLEGEL HERE IN AMERICA THAT MAKES 70,000 A YEAR, TAX FREE… WHY? BECAUSE HE IS MUSLIM AND HE KNOWS EVERY TRICK IN THE BOOK TO GET AWAY WITH IT.

    TOO BAD IF PEOPLE DON’T LIKE HEARING THE TRUTH…

  55. this may surprise you,but i have a very close friend who is muslim.she has only been living in america for 2 years. her english is still not the greatest.she had applied through an internet company for a nanny’s job.the information she gave me about the situation did not sit right with me.i finally after three tiems asking her had her invertigate the family. she found out that is really was only one person.when she realized the situation she told me her had scammed her and her husband out of ten thousand dollars.i had her call the police and it is under investigation now. i really wouldn’t want to see her come to any harm.who knows where it would have gone to if it hadn’t been stopped.i do have compassion for others.i just love my country

  56. I guess I got “lost” in all of the conversations. I don’t think it much matters where people are born or what religion they call themselves. I would be so afraid of a judge I think I’d do whatever he said. But that’s just me. I was wondering though if the police can tell you to put your clothes on, can a judge tell you to take them off? It sounds silly but there are nudist laws and I’m sure that if someone were all naked in the court they’d make them put clothes on. Isn’t there some point where they can make you take your clothes off? It makes sense to me.
    BTW, I live in the neighborhood. We’ve met several times. I just don’t like to use my real name because my Grandson tells me to be careful on the computers. He’s very smart and helped me set everything up.

  57. I don’t think we have met, Dottie. We don’t make it to the Lithuanian side of the neighborhood often.

  58. Ahh, the old “I have a muslim friend” routine. I haven’t heard that one in a while.

    Sue said: if that is what you think i am like then now i really know what kind of a person you are,

    You mean a person that thinks you’re racist and islamophobic? When you claim you agree with other racist commenters, some of us might conclude that you’re a racist too.

    I thought you already determined what kind of person I am when yesterday you wrote: “BACK TO A SANE BLOG. I FOUND SOME REAL AMERICANS IN BIRMINGHAM. TRY IT YOU MIGHT LIKE IT”.

    I took this to mean you thought my opinion made me less of an “American” than you and your islamophobic friends in Birmingham. Perhaps I misunderstood your comment.

  59. THE FACT THAT YOU JUST DIDN’T GET MY MEANING IS WHAT HAS BEEN SO UPSETTING TO ME.WHETHER YOU BELIEVE ME OR NOT DOESN’T MATTER.MY FRIEND COULD HAVE BEEN HURT BADLY.I CAN REST KNOWING THAT SHE WILL NOT ATTEMPT TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS AGAIN WITHOUT LOOKING INTO THE SITUATION A LOT MORE. WHAT IF SHE HAD BEEN TAKEN AND USED FOR SEX.SHE JUST TRUSTED TO WRONG PERSON, AND I TRULY THOUGHT THAT THEY WERE NOT MUSLIM!!!!!!
    YOU ARE THE ONE WHO KEEPS SAYING I AM RACIST.I KEEP TELLING YOU I AM UPSET WITH THE FACT THAT THINGS HAVE BEEN CHANGED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACCOMODATING OTHERS.THINGS THAT COULD BE A THREAT TO EVERYONE.YOU DON’T HAVE TO FEEL THE SAME AS I DO,BUT I CAN HAVE THESE FEELINGS AND STILL NOT BE RACIST.

  60. Historically, Native Americans and Jews have been allowed special privileges by our legal system, why wouldn’t we make the same accommodations for our Muslim population?

    “Native Americans have been granted a legislative exemption by Congress for sacramental use of peyote, and Jews and other religious adherents in the armed services who sought to wear religious apparel also have been granted broader rights through congressional revision of military regulations. Thus, despite having failed to secure judicially mandated exemptions and notwithstanding the minority status of these religious claimants, the political process proved open to and favorably disposed toward those particular claims.”

    GREGORY C. SISK – HOW TRADITIONAL AND MINORITY RELIGIONS FARE IN THE COURTS: EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM RELIGIOUS LIBERTY CASES

  61. Harold D. Lehman wrote an entire book on the subject: Accommodating Religious Needs: The Mennonite and Amish Perspective.

    The abstract: Discusses legal issues concerning the First Amendment rights of Amish and Mennonite students and parents. Focuses on court decisions that upheld their rights of religious liberty and reviews the origins of their beliefs. Contends that most of the government decisions regarding religion and education reflect a fundamental respect for the religious beliefs of minorities.

    Sue, are you also outraged by the practice of accommodating Amish and Mennonite students?

  62. I’m still trying to understand how what women wear in public pools poses a threat to you. Unless there’s some other rule change that you see as threatening, the swimsuit policy in at the Wasthenaw County pool doesn’t threaten anyone except maybe bikini manufacturers.

  63. IF YOU HAVE EVER OWNED A POOL YOU WOULD KNOW THAT THERE ARE REASONS YOU DON’T ALLOW EXCESS CLOTHINHG FOR TWO REASONS,THE FILTER WILL ONLY TAKE SO MUCH LINT AND THREATS THAT COME OFF OF TEXTILES,AND EXCESS CLOTHING CAN COMPROMISE A SWIMMERS ABILITY IN SWIMMING.

  64. IF YOU HAVE EVER OWNED A POOL YOU WOULD KNOW THAT THERE ARE REASONS YOU DON’T ALLOW EXCESS CLOTHINHG FOR TWO REASONS,THE FILTER WILL ONLY TAKE SO MUCH LINT AND THREATS THAT COME OFF OF TEXTILES,AND EXCESS CLOTHING CAN COMPROMISE A SWIMMERS ABILITY IN SWIMMING.

  65. I TOLD YOU THIS ONCE BEFORE,BUT YOU BLEW IT OFF AS NOTHING,YOU SAID THAT YOU WERE SURE THE FOLKS AT THE WASHTENAW P&R COULD HANDLE ANY FILTER EMERGENCY.

  66. The “excessively loose” clothing issue was addressed, it’s in the article you referred us to:

    For health reasons, the policy also said that “clothing must not be excessively loose such that it could pose an entanglement.”

    Clothing suggested by the pool staff is a nylon jogging suit which doesn’t produce lint. Even if they did, I know lint filters in public pools can handle tremendous amounts of lint. I remember when I took my lifesaving class we had to jump in the pool fully clothed and tread water for several minutes. I didn’t see pool technicians scrambling to save the pumps from the collective lint of 30 students.

    I trust that the staff of Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation can manage any extra load on the lint filters they might encounter. You obviously think they will be overwhelmed with lint and they will throw up their hands in defeat and then allow the pool to be overcome with bacteria.

    I’m decidedly unconvinced that your safety is threatened.

  67. WELL I THINK IT’S AMAZING THAT YOU KNOW WHAT I OBVIOUSLY THINK AND ALSO I AM TRULY CONVINCED THAT MY SAFETY AND THE SAFETY OF OTHERS COULD BE JEOPARDIZED.I WOULDN’T BE HERE IF I DIDN’T.

  68. I think your scenario of filter-clogging lint coupled with incompetent pool attendants is totally ridiculous.

  69. ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU STEVE,SINCE TYOU SEEM TO KNOW SO MUCH ABOUT THE MUSLIM RELIGION.WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE FACE BEING COVERED

  70. YOU AND STEVE MUST BE RELATED,OR AT LEAST YOU SHOULD BE!!!
    ACTUALLY THE WORLD IS CONCERNED ABOUT FEMALE HEADWEAR.,BUT YOU WOULDN’T THINK IT COULD EVER BE A PROBLEM,

  71. YOU AND STEVE MUST BE RELATED,OR AT LEAST YOU SHOULD BE
    ACTUALLY THE WORLD IS CONCERNED ABOUT FEMALE HEADWEAR.BUT YOU WOULDN’T THINK THAT COULD EVER BE A PROBLEM,

  72. sue-

    as far as the muslim religion goes, the Qur’an tells women to wear a khimar (24:31), which is a headcover and a jilbab (33:59) which is a long cloak.

    furthermore, wikipedia is a good sorce of information. the article explains different kinds of veils.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niqab

    and don’t believe the rumor that women should wear hijab because men cannot control their sexual urges. there are plenty of burqa clad women being raped in afghanistan. rape is about power, not sex. a man is responsible for controlling his own sexual urges by lowering the gaze, fasting and contracting a legitimate marriage.

  73. Islam does not impose polygamy as a universal practice. One should regard monogamy as the norm and polygamy as the exception.

    For Muslim men to have more than one wife is a permission which is given to them in the Quran, not to satisfy lust, but for the welfare of the widows and the orphans of the wars.(Dr. Emad & Noora Hammoude, http://www.hammoude.com/Faq21.html)

    Marry women of your choice. Two, three, or four. However, if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly [with them], then only one or [a captive] that your right hand possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (Quran, 4:3)

    Unless a man is confident that he can be scrupulously fair to all his wives, he must remain monogamous. Muslim law has built on this: a man must spend absolutely the same amount of time with each of his wives; besides treating each wife equally financially and legally, a man must not have the slightest preference for one but must esteem and love them all equally. It has been widely agreed in the Islamic world that mere human beings cannot fulfill this Quranic requirement: it is impossible to show such impartiality and as a result Muhammad’s qualification, which he need not have made, means no Muslim should really have more than one wife. (Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Biography Of The Prophet, p. 191)

  74. angel, that’s like saying that there’s something wrong with Christianity because some offshoots of the Mormon church still practice polygamy.

  75. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi argues that Qur’an mentions khumur [head covering] as a 7th century Arabian dress, but there is no command to wear it in specific. In his interpretation of verse 33:59, he argues that “they may be known, and thus they will not be given trouble” and the context of the verse shows that the directive to wear jalabib [robe] was not of permanent nature. He also believes that the special restrictions for wives of Muhammad are not applicable to all women at all times. He considers “head-covering” for women a cherished part of Muslim social custom and tradition but not compulsory. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javed_Ahmed_Ghamid

    John Esposito writes that the customs of veiling and seclusion of women in early Islam were assimilated from the conquered Persian and Byzantine societies and then later on they were viewed as appropriate expressions of Quranic norms and values. The Qur’an does not stipulate veiling or seclusion; on the contrary, it tends to emphasize the participation of religious responsibility of both men and women in society.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Esposito

  76. WOW NADINE AND STEVE, YOUR LAST POSTS ARE BOTH VERY INTERESTING AND PUT A DIFFERENT LIGHT ON THE MUSLIM RELIGION FOR ME

  77. Sue, dont’ be fooled by their post. muslims also believe a girl can be married once she has her first period. so lets say a girls starts at age 11. some 60 year creep and married her. in america that sex with a minor. and i call it rape, i don’t care if they call it marriage. it is raping a child. also in the muslim faith it is okay for a man to rape a girl. take her to her father and say i raped her and i will marry her. the father will give his blessing and no charge will be made. both of these facts happen everyday in ALL muslim countries. so don’t be fooled by the wolf in sheep clothing.

  78. Just because the religion belief is to have more than one wife they still need to follow the law of the country they live in. And getting the girls married as soon as they have their first period id sick!!! How can a little girl deal with so much so soon??? No wonder some of the women want out of a marriage.

  79. ABDUL,
    NOT TO WORRY THIS HAS NOT CHANGED MY THOUGHTS ON THE MUSLIM RELIGION.I DON’T CARE WHERE YOU LIVE I MYSELF BELIEVE THAT POLYGAMY IS A CRIME FOR WHAT EVER REASON,AND NO ONE WILL CHANGE MY MIND ME THAT THERE ARE THOSE WHO BELIEVE YOU DON’T HAVE TO WEAR ANY HEAD DRESS TO DEMONSTRATE YOUR FAITH

  80. ACTUALLY STEVE YOU MAKE ME FEEL YOU ARE AN UNUSUALLY DEFENSIVE PERSON WHEN IT COME TO THESE TOPICS

  81. sue-

    do you ever use google, aol, msn, or yahoo search?

    ask.com?

    i doubt steve has all of that information stored in his computer. unless he’s shopping around for a mail-order bride.

  82. I HAVE READ SOME NON-FICTIONS AND FOUND THEM QUITE INTERESTING SINCE WE ARE PASSING ALONG SUGGESTIONS FOR OTHERS TO LOOK AT.
    SOLD BY ZANA MUHSEN
    WITHOUT MERCY BY MIRIAM ALI
    A PROMISE TO NADIA BY ZARAH MUHSEN
    FORBIDDEN LOVE BY NORMA KHOURI
    ENJOY

  83. It is my understanding that the wearing of the veil is not actually religious but customary. If that is the case then I don’t believe that the Judge was wrong. We say we want equality yet in some cases we give more freedoms to foreign customs than to native ones.

  84. veronica-

    i agree with your point, although it is difficult to argue, that there is a line between cultural and religious practices. i don’t know too much about the history of the veil. but i do know that the Quran tells women to wear a khimar (24:31), which is a headcover and a jilbab (33:59) which is a long cloak.

    what are you referring to when you say “yet in some cases we give more freedoms to foreign customs than to native ones”?

  85. Some of the scholarly articles I looked at this week theorized that those garments might have been describing Mohammad’s wives. I forget which article …

  86. It does sound as if Ginnnah Muhammad as acting like, well, a new convert. And new converts of any religion or political types can take their views to the extreme. Which could explain with at least a twenty year history in Hamtramck, this hasn’t happened before. And the judge was pretty much saying he couldn”t make a fair judgement without seeing her face. I don’t know much about small claims, but couldn’t she now appeal her case to a new judge?

  87. as for the claim in the lawsuit, some of it do not sound right. like,1 what do the car rental company have to do with the vehical being broken in to.2 why didn’t she have insurance. Any time i have rented a vehical i had to have insurance. and if you don’t have auto insurance you can buy it though the car rental for the time you are renting the vehical. and since she is a born american, i assume she can read english, didn’t she read the contrat? It states she is respondable for any damages. so if she did not have any insurance it is her own fault. it is lying fake muslims like her that give us real muslilms a bad name.

  88. Nadine –

    “what are you referring to when you say “yet in some cases we give more freedoms to foreign customs than to native ones”?”

    For example, if you were to go into court wearing a baseball cap, jean shorts, and tennis shoes you would be asked to go home and come back when you have dressed appropriately. Why is that? Maybe because it is viewed as disrespectful to the court, yet it is “all american” to wear baseball caps and tennis shoes.

    Why then would it not be appropriate to as a young lady to remove her veil while in court (much less only while testifying)?

    The niqab, I understand, is to portray modesty or shyness. I respect that. But I feel that you have to give a little to take a little. No one was asking her to display her face to the entire court, only to the judge while speaking on her own behalf in a dispute.

    Speaking of which, I really don’t understand her reasoning for refusing, after all she did rent a vehicle which requires a valid drivers license. And that drivers license required a photo without the veil. So, I ask, why would she unveil for a photo (which is permanent) and not for a judge (for only minutes)?

  89. I think saying that people would be asked to go home if improperly dressed for court is bit of a stretch. People show up in casual attire all the time, especially in small claims and landlord/tenant cases.

    The baseball cap would be up to the judge, I know many of them don’t allow men in hats or sunglasses. With that said I think it’s in the best interest of all parties involved in a case if they put on some decent clothes for court.

    I’m not sure anyone here is arguing that she shouldn’t be required to remove her niqab if a judge determines it necessary.

  90. Hamtramck Sheik Fabisczak says when he becomes Mayor he will have a wife
    for every out of style pants suit he owns!

  91. I wonder about the accuracy of that article:

    “A devout Muslim woman (from Yemen)…”

    She’s not from Yemen.

  92. Thought you may find this interesting!!!!!

    Quebec town outlines societal ‘norms’ for would-be immigrants
    Mon Jan 29, 6:52 PM

    By Dene Moore

    HEROUXVILLE, Que. (CP) – A sign at the entrance of this rural Quebec town says: Herouxville welcomes you. Unless, that is, you plan on stoning a woman to death, sending your kids to school with a kirpan or covering your face other than on Halloween.

    The town council of Herouxville, a sleepy town dominated by a towering Roman Catholic church, has adopted a declaration of “norms” that it says would-be immigrants should be aware of before they settle in this town.

    Among them, it is forbidden to stone women or burn them with acid.

    Children cannot carry weapons to school. That includes ceremonial religious daggers like kirpans even though the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that Sikhs can carry kirpans in schools.

    However, children can swim in a pool with other children – boys and girls alike because they can’t be segregated.

    And for the record, female police officers in Herouxville, 165 kilometres northwest of Montreal, can arrest male suspects. Also part of the declaration is to allow women to drive, dance and make decisions on their own.

    “We’re telling people who we are,” said Andre Drouin, one of six town councillors and the driving force behind the declaration passed earlier this month.

    The small town, near Shawinigan in central Quebec, has only one immigrant family and wants more.

    But Drouin said the declaration, which was posted on the town’s website and sent to the provincial and federal immigration ministers, is the result of a number of recent culture clashes across the country.

    In Montreal, a dispute erupted after the windows of a gym were obscured to block the view of exercising women from the Hasidic Jewish synagogue across the street and swimming pools have been asked for gender-specific swim times to accommodate religious groups.

    Men were banned from prenatal classes at one Montreal community centre to accommodate Muslim, Sikh and Hindu women and a city police publication came under fire for suggesting female officers should defer to male colleagues when dealing with men from certain religions.

    In Toronto, a judge caused an uproar last month by ordering a Christmas tree removed from a courthouse so as not to offend non-Christians.

    Debate has raged in Quebec in recent weeks about so-called “reasonable accommodation” of ethnic, cultural and religious minorities and a Montreal police officer is facing disciplinary action over a song circulating on the Internet about it.

    “I asked myself, ‘How is it that these people can ask for such things?’ And the only possible answer is that these people do not know who we are,” Drouin said.

    According to the five-page declaration, in Herouxville children sing Christmas songs at Christmas and adults can drink alcohol.

    Immigrants want to be part of Canada, Drouin said, and to do that they need to know what is acceptable and what isn’t.

    It’s something the federal immigration department has failed to do, he said.

    Drouin said the more accommodations made for minorities, the greater the divide.

    “One of these days you will have (many divided) groups in Canada and groups in Canada, or groups in any country, doesn’t make a country,” he said.

    Premier Jean Charest said Monday that in Quebec men and women are already equal under the law and that Shariah law has been rejected.

    Quebecers are tolerant, Charest said.

    “I think it’s an isolated case,” he said.

    B’nai Brith Quebec deemed the declaration “an anti-immigrant, anti-ethnic backlash” and Salam Elmenyawi, head of the Muslim Council of Montreal, called it insulting.

    “Why are they picking on Islam and Muslims?” he asked, adding he wonders why the Herouxville council hasn’t weighed in on society’s ills in general.

    The declaration is full of stereotypes, he said, adding that his wife can drive a car and Muslim women do have rights.

    Elmenyawi said Quebec is tolerant overall, but the Herouxville council is “confused and misguided.”

    “I can’t imagine Muslims immigrating there,” Elmenyawi said.

    But Drouin, who was juggling dozens calls Monday, said the town, which has just one immigrant family among its 1,338 residents, welcomes newcomers.

    “We need them and we want them. And we also want them to have made the correct choice for them,” he said.

    He said the town council has received about 2,000 e-mails, the vast majority supportive.

    The declaration was the talk of the town, a typical Quebec village stretched out on a country road just north of Shawinigan.

    “I’m not a racist but, at a certain point we’re all going to end up that way,” Carole Casabon, one of many local residents who support the declaration, said as she served up some regulars at the Pub 842.

    “If we travel abroad, we try to adapt to their way of life. But when they come here, they abide by their own rules.”

  93. Normally, your post would be deleted because you pasted an article in it’s entirety without crediting your source or providing a link.

    http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=e585b274-6dd7-4394-8aab-e60cc907bb5b&k=89152

    This is worth saving though. A town of 1300 people in Quebec, where English often isn’t an accepted form of communication, has worked themselves into a froth over the habits and clothing of women who don’t even live there. If their sign actually says what this article claims it does, they are uneducated xenophobes.

    An update to this story was posted on Monday.

    http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=4b3585a7-a3c4-4a0d-bada-7062cb848c09

    Jeff Heinrich, CanWest News Service; Montreal Gazette
    Published: Monday, February 12, 2007

    HEROUXVILLE, Que. – A small group of Muslim women was given mostly a warm reception when they dropped in Sunday to a Quebec town that passed divisive guidelines for immigrants.

    Bearing gifts, nine Muslim women from Montreal paid a visit to Herouxville, which is at the centre of the province’s “reasonable accomodation” debate.

    Well-educated, poised and speaking flawless French, the women were mostly immigrants from Arab countries or immigrants who had grown up in Montreal.

  94. Yeah, I was wondering who else would notice the irony of a town in Quebec preaching about Canadian integration. :P

  95. Forget about Saudi, foget about going back to where you came from. Remember that everyone in this country came from somewhere and a Muslim just like any other person belongs here if he or she is American. After saying that I would like to add no doubt Mohammed might be a narrow minded terrorist but arent we bieng narrow minded ourselves by judging muslims? I mean we should be way beyond that if we are not “wierdos like the Muslims out there” but are we that different? Is it really Muslims who are wierd or is it just some people within a ethnic/religious group. I know that not all muslims cover their face/head and its only a few who choose to do that but its their damn choice what right do we have in interfering with their choice or any other choice for that matter. This case is definitely complicated but an alternative does exist. Instead of using the alternative this case has turned into a media cicur. In my opinion everyone should be given a fair and equal chance because that is what this country is about….we are so much more that the narrow minded comment we make so give people a chance here!

  96. I totally agree with Ferrari because everone in this country has a right! Therefore, Mohammed asked for her right which was to show her face to a female judge and she should have gotten it!

  97. They ones I want in front of Judge Paruk are the veil-wearer’s straying husbands that ride around Hamtramck in a mini-van that pop the door open; thinking that every free American woman without a male escort is a prostitute. They have some nerve! What hypocrites they are. Their wives wear those veils to hide their tears. No one is safe in Hamtramck walking to the grocery store with these repressed cultures around us. Everyday is Halloween it seems! I say get some undercover (or under-veil; surveillance female cops to bust these perverts who are willing to bring deseases home to their veil-wearing wives. How backwards is that!?

  98. Unfortunately, street harassment and prostitution are human activities that no culture is exempt from. I carry a camera to the grocery store these days to use as counter-harassment.

Comments are closed.