Weren't Hamas democratically elected? Kinda funny how they are as a terrorist group now.

State terrorism, being democratically elected doesn't mean they can't commit acts of terrorism. Israel has been guilty of it in the past as well actually.

That would be nice but it's essentially naive as well.  The group feels that they need to circumvent the usual complaining and voting procedures that the western democracies use, as well as have big chips on their shoulders, the combo of which is deadly.  In short we'll use whatever identification or other classification methods if we can.  And since the majority of terrorists are muslims, then ........ we'll assume that most of them are muslim.  I dont see the harm in that kamal.

You were the one that brought up hamas, kamal.  But since you did bring it up, they are another poor group.  The muslims around the middle east send all kinds of $$$$$ over to hamas so that more people can be blown up.  They wont send soldiers for the effort, just bucks.  True friends.

erm, that's not what I meant.

Banning burqa because most of the terrorists call themselves muslims doesn't make sense, these people who take their anger out on women wearing burqa are similar to the terrorists taking out their anger on innocent people, in a less harmful way but still harmful and stupid

and I really would like to stop now and go back to the topic and discuss if burqa should be banned or not for the reasons the girl just stated :)

Ignorance is bliss I suppose.......I have not the patience nor the time to tear this post apart but I will give you a hint as to what I was going to go on a rant about....Hitler was not a muslim.

Well they were a terrorist group and THEN directly elected.

They aren't recognized as the leaders of Gaza though for a couple good reasons.

The first being... it would completly fuck over Gaza.

The rocket attacks and suicide bombings that are currently considered acts of terrorism would instead be considered acts of war.  Giving Israel a lot more free reign then they have now to retaliate.

The people of Gaza didn't elect Hamas because of the terrorist attacks but inspite of them because Hamas uses a lot of it's "funding" to help people in the area and may actually be less corrupt then the PLO... but if they ever were actually recognized... all hell would break loose.

Hamas just gives Israel more execuse to take more and more land and maybe even all of Gaza eventually.  The first step to piece is Hamas realizing they're hurting and not helping.

They seem to have realized that recently.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8601171.stm

@ sad man loves vgc--Sure, it doesn't make sense, but like I said, perhaps people are getting tired of terrorists coming from one religion, and constantly requiring a high level of security primarily because of this one group. It's only natural that they start to punish that group, but if you are trying to say that banning burqa's has nothing directly to do with terrorism I agree with that.

There is no way they could fuck over Gaza more than Gaza is being fucked over by Israel. The siege of Gaza is an atrocity. The reason they aren't recognized is because almost nobody wants the instability of a militant government in the middle east.

Are Burqas allowed in airports? That i think would help...

It is a cultural thing, though, because a very very long time ago the Burqa was a symbol of a free woman who could be married, or was married, whereas slave women had to walk bare, but given that slavery is over, it's one of those archaic things that lives on without especial purpose (at least in the sense of something women would *want* to wear as a status symbol)

Still though, there's no real reason for a societal ban. It raises the question of where certain religious practices clash with society enough to void freedom of religion concerns