Memo To USAF – Neither Beards Nor Scarves Required Of Muslims!

Poor Sergeant Gaitan!

He’s a United States Air Force man, an apostate who converted to Islam, granted a ‘religious waiver permitting a beard…’ a privilege which the USAF apparently gave him because they think beards are obligatory for Muslims.

Poor deluded USAF!

====

Here’s a photo of the two 2019 presidential candidates here in Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim majority country.

…

——

Both Prabowo and Jokowi would be outraged if anyone suggested they were not serious about their adherence to the Muslim faith.

They are diligent about attending mosque prayers and both are courting the Muslim vote, as noted here in recent months.

Please examine their chins very carefully.

NO BEARD!

There are numerous Muslims in Jakarta who do sport beards. I don’t do head-counts on my frequent bus journeys round town, but it’s safe to say bearded men are a minority.

So what’s happened is that the USAF has allowed Gaitan a privilege that is not a rule decreed by his creed but by his personal interpretation of certain sectarian diktats.

Same goes for the head-scarf shrills, but we have covered that before. 

An Archaic Tribal Rag’ – Wise UK Muslim Imam Says ‘Ban the Burqa!’ 

It’s on the BBC! Bag-Head Bans Do Not Infringe Religious Liberty! 

Fiery Islamists – ‘Head-Scarves NOT a Big Issue!’ 

Still, we have not yet reached the most appalling segment of this report, a rant that is bound to provoke ‘Islamophobia’ among Americans and patriotic people in many another country too.

Sergeant Gaitan has been targetted by an Un-American bigot, named Zahra Billoo, who turns out to be the ‘executive director of the San Francisco chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)’

We know all about CAIR…

Take Action To Curb CAIR! 

…an abominable outfit.

The bigoted bint taunted the sergeant by saying that you can “now rock your Sunnah beard while bombing your Muslim brothers and sisters.”

That kind of stuff is what causes real resentment…

..

Zahra Billoo – a repeat lawfare whiner, she has ‘has filed lawsuits against the United States Department of Justice, Abercrombie & Fitch, and Southwest Airlines,’ so her CAIR website says, and unsurprisingly she’s “ a fellow with the American Leadership Forum’s Silicon Valley Chapter…”

…because such bilge very clearly suggests that sectarian solidarity ought to count for more than duty to one’s own country…

…as if American Muslims should feel they have more in common with aliens of the same religion than with their own fellow-citizens, who of course are much more truly their ‘brothers and sisters,’ whatever their creed.

That supranation sectarian affiliation counts for more than national allegiance is a disgraceful notion.

Americans, or Brits, or anyone who thinks like that, should be advised to take a hike and take up residence in some jihadist dump overseas.

News? That Prince Philip Has A Sense Of Humour?

Very odd, what some media see as newsworthy.

The Duke of Edinburgh pointed out a bearded man and asked “is that a terrorist?” as he greeted crowds at Sandringham, it has been claimed.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/prince-philip-asked-if-bearded-man-was-terrorist

It has been claimed….??

What’s to claim, since nothing remotely amiss was said.

It’s phrased as if HRH had spat on somebody’s shoes, or denounced some Scotsman hack-reporter as a good-for-nothing pain in the rear end!

While not all bearded men are terrorists, one of the terrorist trade-marks is a disgusting sort of beard, and Islamist undesirables do seem to sport vile, matted things, resembling road-kill, on their chins.

============================

• 
• =======

• Sine the poor traumatised victim of the Prince’s humour had a ginger-beard, it’s probable he wasn’t a terrorist, though with various British and other European apostates known to have joined the treason trail to Mosul in recent times, who knows?

• But WHY is this in the Scotsman’s ‘news’ section at all?

• The Duke of Edinburgh has never been one of those simpering twits who weighs up a funny remark  before he utters it, to  make sure it won’t ‘offend’ uptights.

• The Scotsman itself mentions previous examples, not uproariously hilarious, perhaps, but amusing enough, as when he ‘asked a group of Aboriginal Australians during a visit in 2002: “Do you still throw spears at each other?”

• Prince Philip obviously knew they gave up that pastime years ago, so he was joking, and the Aborigines would have know  that too.

• Only a prissy prat would be offended.

•    

• ===

• He also once asked a disabled 60-year-old man on a mobility scooter: “How many people have you knocked over this morning on that thing?”

• That made me chuckle, at least. Did anyone object at the time?

• No normal person would go into huffy tantrum mode because of those witticisms.

• What’s the big deal?

Beard Bollocks in UK – But Tajiks Confront Alien Influence!

In 2015, the United State Supreme Court produced some of the most inane rulings ever, the worst of course being its indefensible endorsement of queer ‘marriage.’

=========================

• 
• —————-

• But one that’s sometimes been overlooked, as an example of judicial dimwittery, occurred almost exactly a year ago, when the court exemplified what many Americans see as its role as Nine Men Against America.
• It decreed that Muslim criminals had a ‘right’ to sport beards.

High Court Says Muslim Inmate Can Keep Beard – WSJ

 Let’s ignore the individual who won his case – a self-described Islamic fundamentalist who the state said threatened to wage jihad against law-enforcement officials.

–

 –

He was convicted of threatening President George W Bush’s daughters a decade ago, and is serving a life term for stabbing his girlfriend., – except to say it would make much better sense to string him up than prattle about his rights.

So on to the latest news from the UK.

—

Vicars should grow BEARDS to reach out to Muslims in their areas, says Bishop of London 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3412363/Bishop-London-applauds-vicars-grown-beards-reach-Muslims-Tower-Hamlets.html

This turbulent priest says his beard helps his rapport with Bangladeshis in his diocese – they’ve been there for years but apparently many are still recalcitrantly refusing to smarten up and adapt to British ways. He’s certainly not helping them assimilate with his pathetic appeasement.

But what needs to be made clear is this – 

It’s complete BOLLOCKS to say that growing and maintaining a beard is any part of a Muslim man’s religious duty.

———-

•  Sukarno, Founder and first President of Indonesia
•   Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, President till a year ago
• ———————

• I could post photos of every Indonesian President since independence – all Muslims and all (except Megawati) men – you’d see not one beard.

Even fanatic Muslims, like the ghastly Suryadharma Ali, and Anis Matta, till recently leader of the PKS Islamist party and big fan of Osama Bin Laden…

—-

 Ali

 Anis

—-

…are beardless.

Not all fanatics have visible chins, of course, but it goes to show it’s a matter of choice, identical to Muslim women’s choice when it comes to head-scarves.

————-

——-

A ban on beards is no denial of religious liberty, any more than a burka ban, or even a head-scarf ban.

I’m motivated to pen a few words on the subject not just because of the Babbling Bishop, but due to the news from Tajikistan, where my stats indicate I have one or two readers. The BBC tells us that numerous men have been forcibly shaven.

If a guy grows a beard because he thinks it will enhance his cool, I’d not bother him. Dislike of a fashion is not a great reason to call for a ban.

——-

——-

Though the fashion nowadays among some men, of appearing unshaven every day – apparently called ‘designer stubble’ – is so slovenly that a ban is a tempting call to make.

And it’s proper to admit that when I was considerably younger than I am today, my chin was adorned with quite a good beard, emulating the singer in one of my fave Sixties pop bands, Manfred Mann.

No moustache, just the beard, very distinctive and SO cool (or so  I thought then!)

——–

—-

But in today’s Tajikistan, the move against beards is seen as part of a broader government campaign against the adoption of Islamic cultural practices in Tajik society, and to preserve secular traditions. 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35372754

The Beeb reports that almost 100% of Tajiks are Muslim. Yet the government is waging war on beards?

Why?

Because it is alarmed at the emergence of the evil jihadist ideology.

It does seem to be true that, as opposed to simply fanatical believers, the scum who join terrorist outfits and commit atrocities DO wear beards, except when they need to disguise themselves from the security forces.

They may do so for ‘religious’ reasons, although satanic beasts like those below are hardly ‘religious’ in any meaningful sense, but…

———————

a, 

————–

…they do succeed in making themselves look evil.

However, a beard is not, in and of itself, proof of wickedness.

So is the Tajik campaign justified?

I’m not convinced that force-shaving is either fair or wise. Like I said, some lads think they’re cooler by not shaving. Others have weak chins they wish to hide.

But a campaign of persuasion is easily defensible. If the government points out that monsters like Imam Samoedra…

——–..

 Bali Bomb Pig with a paltry excuse for a beard

———

…the infamous Bali Bom Pig, are hardly role-models for any decent human being, you’d hope your average Tajik would nod in agreement.

And if there are some who flaunt their facial hair as a gesture of solidarity with evil, then surely it makes them all the easier to spot!

Nice to see, BTW, that a campaign to persuade Tajik women to skip the scarf of subjugation  – they’ve apparently convinced 1,773 women to stop wearing hijabs this past year – and to eschew black in favour of the nation’s traditional bright colours, is under way.