Hijab is the head scarf. It’s frequently worn with a full-length trench-coat looking garment.

Burka is the blue tent worn in Afghanistan. It has a little beanie hat on top with mesh sewn in across the eyes to see out of. But it’s full length and a tent.

Abaya is the black robe worn in Saudi Arabia which is also full-length and a tent. It can be worn with the face open and viewable, or with a veil across the nose so that only the eyes are available.

The niqab is the more severe version of the abaya where the whole face is covered, including the forehead, with a little string thingy going along the nose from the forehead material to the material under the eyes to make sure it doesn’t slip down under the nose. The only thing viewable are two beady little eyes peering out on either side of the string thingy. I think the niqab is also the version where the female entity wears gloves so that infidels are denied the pleasure of seeing her sweaty wrists.

Fletcher Christian specifically said he closed the door in the face of an entity wearing the niqab, not the hijab. In other words, s/he was being as offensive to Western society as s/he could possibly be. Frequently niqab-wearers are Western women who have converted to Islam and who are going overboard in their zealotry to demonstrate how much they despise the country and religion they were born into.

And, don’t you think if the female involved did belong to a man who was that strict that he would be allowing her out on her own to begin with?

I think if you come up against a person in either a niqab or a burka on the streets of London or Manhattan or Paris, the first question you need to ask yourself is what are they hiding dynamite-wise under that get-up, and the second question is whether it’s a man or a woman because the nonverbal message is one of arrogance and hatred, and not peaceful coexistance.

I commented then in Belmont’s old location, and several points seem worth recalling:

(1) There is a pretty huge amount of Uranium to be extracted from phosphate rocks, and the Middle East has vast phosphate deposits. Several sources indicate that Syria has one fifth of the phosphates in the region.

(2) As early as 2001, the International Atomic Energy Agency was aware that Syria was extracting Uranium from phosphates near Homs, and had nominally imposed some sort of safeguard provisions. Quite obviously, those “safeguard provisions” were utterly inadequate to prevent the Syrians from applying the extracted Uranium to a nuclear weapons program.

The occurrence of nuclear fuel AND bomb material in these deposits has serious implications for conflicts and alliances around the world, in addition to the specific security problems posed by facilities like Al-Kibar.

I’ll give ‘em their hijabs, if they feel they must. But anything that covers the face is offensive and the people wearing those garments must know that it’s offensive in the West to do so. If whoever is wearing that garb has determined it’s their right to be offensive to me, then why on earth should I be polite back?

Thanks for noticing.

Durable persistence of DESIGN, that’s the problem, not the particular devices that the DESIGN will always spit out.

Dude, do not stand in front of a .357, no matter how old it looks.