Boaz, stop wriggling, you lost this one fair and square.

>>Symbols can have meaning attributed them the AT their inception, AND they can be given different or additional meaning as time goes by according to their use. Now that wasn't hard was it ?<<

Not hard, but wrong.

Remember, please, where this part of the discussion started. You raved on about

>>SYMBOLS........

Islamic Head Scalf....
-Genocide of a whole Tribe of Jews (Systematic beheading of Banu Qurayza Males)
Tabari VIII:38 "The Messenger of Allah commanded that all of the Jewish men and boys who had reached puberty should be beheaded. Then the Prophet divided the wealth, wives, and children of the Banu Qurayza Jews among the Muslims."<<

The fact is, the symbolism of the headscarf is entirely in your head.

Think a little more clearly. The Swastika was intended by the Nazis to be used as both a motivator of supporters and to strike fear into opponents. All the horrors perpetrated in its shadow were not the fault of the symbol, but the people who manipulated it.

It had previously been used as a peace symbol - even its name came from the Sanskrit "svastika" - "su" meaning "good," "asti" meaning "to be," and "ka" as a suffix.

As for the hammer and sickle:

"The two tools are symbols of the peasantry and the industrial proletariat; placing them together symbolises the unity between agricultural and industrial workers." - Wikipedia

Symbolism can in no way be inherent in an object. It's in your head.

If you disbelieve me, what meaning was attributed to the headscarf at its inception?

While you are about it, tell us when this inception took place.

So once again I ask, on what basis did you exclude the Christian cross from your list, given that any number of atrocities were carried out in its name?

While you're at it, Boazy you old rascal, would you mind answering the questions I posed to you last Monday:

"Just out of interest, Boazy - what in your analysis does the headscarf routinely worn in public by your Exclusive Brethren cousins symbolise? I've seen numerous photos of EB women, resplendent in frumpy 19th century dresses, and always sporting headscarves.

Is this another symbol of pernicious Mohammedanism - or is it just good old Abrahamic patriarchy expressed sartorially? "

CJ Morgan,

Who gives a damn what you or anybody wears.

Why is Exclusive Brethren attire of concern to you?
Is it because you think EB is a threat to freedom & democracy? If not, what are you on about exactly?

Do you have something meaningful to tell?

GZ Tan: "Who gives a damn what you or anybody wears."

It appears that our Islamophobic friend is not only rude, offensive and bigoted, but has also forgotten what the article was about (or is being disingenuous). Just to remind GZ Tan, it seems that the practice of Muslim women wearing headscarves is somehow threatening to various people who presume to lecture us about what the scarf supposedly symbolises, and how our society is under attack from these evil, untrustworthy Muslims.

GZ Tan: "Why is Exclusive Brethren attire of concern to you?
Is it because you think EB is a threat to freedom & democracy?"

I asked Brother Boazy for his semiotic analysis of the EB headscarf, because according to his learned interpretation, the "Islamic Head Scalf" (sic) symbolises:

"Genocide of a whole Tribe of Jews (Systematic beheading of Banu Qurayza Males)...
-Justification of sex slavery. 23:5-6
-Cursing of other specific religions and races (Jews and Christians)9:30
-Death for simply insulting their prophet. -Death for rejecting their prophet after you have accepted him. (hadith references)
-A man driven by lust and misogeny- producing a culture of the same character. 33:50
-Justification of wife beating. 4:34
-Prostitution re-packaged as 'temporary marriage' and justified for males.4:24
-Child exploitation/ sexual abuse of female children. (Aisha)"

Now, given that female members of the more extreme branch of his own sect habitually wear headscarves that are not very different from those that adorn Muslim women, I think that it's reasonable to ask Boazy what it is that practice means in the context of his own Abrahamic religion.

And yes, I do think that the Exclusive Brethren are a threat to our freedom and democracy, given the underhand and dishonest means they use to try and influence the outcomes of the democratic process in which they refuse to participate.

Why is it that their women are required to wear scarves, Boazy? What do they symbolise?

CJ Morgan,

You think Exclusive Brethren refuse to participate in democracy but (strangely) can influence democracy?

Are EB actually magicians that threaten freedom and democracy? Have you been to a psychiatrist?

You either talk nonsense or throw one-liners and gratuitous jibes at others.

No one here is "Islamophobic" because Islam is a proven threat to freedom and democracy. There is no illogical, exaggerated fear borned out of ignorance.

Since you care to quote BD's list of Islamic evils, perhaps you do agree Islam has a history of wicked atrocities.

Now my question to your "EB-phobic" self :

Can you justify your thinking that EB (other than being 'dishonest', 'underhanded'), constitutes a threat to freedom and democracy, MORE so than Islam?

Be warned your argument had better be logical, factual, qualitative and quantitative.

Failure to do so will prove you are a "EB-phobic" (possessing illogical, exaggerated fear and prejudice), and a hypocrite, a fool for labelling me "phobic".

What kind of head scarf is this?

see picture

http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=485142007

Is this the young girls choice? Islam? Muslims? Iran's? A tool of terror and abuse? Or harmless fun in the name of world politics?