There are many good reasons to ban the moving bed sheet attire, apparently so deeply coveted as status symbols by Muslim women. Even if one is dubious of Islam's claim that its women really do like looking like unmade gliding beds, there are societal and cultural reasons why the Hijab should be banned. In short banning the Burqa, the Hijab and the Niqab would ban Islam's direct and anti-social assault on Western values.

Many girls are murdered across the Islamic world, some for the petty crime of not wanting to look like their parents unmade bed. Covering women up is not necessarily mandated in the Koran, but it stems from Arab culture and their misogynistic attitude towards the female. In Arab and Muslim culture the male rules, the female obeys, and the female is branded as a piece of property, a cow, a man's dog, chattel to serve and please the man. This is one of the keystones of Arab and Islamic culture and of Islam supremacism. Islam is a male dominated cult.

But the Muslim fetish for bed-sheet wear goes beyond even simple misogyny. It is a direct assault on the West. If you read Ed Hussein's book on 'Why I became an Islamist and left', the former English Muslim makes it very clear that women wear the bed sheet dress to express superiority over Western values, and to assert their distinctiveness. They wear the Burqa [complete body covering including the hands], the Jilbab, [full body covering with the face open]; the Hijab [headscarf with the face left open], or the Niqab [full body covering with only the eyes visible]; as a statement of Islamic superiority. It is a conscious act of Muslim supremacism. Done to intimidate the West.

Should we put up with this?

Bed sheets and their anti-Westen, female-branding are outlawed in public spaces in Holland, France, Germany, and Turkey. The UK, Australia, Canada and the US need to follow suit. Melanie Philips the author of 'Londinistan, How Britain is Creating a Terror State Within', recently told an audience at the Middle East Forum in London that 'wearing the Niqab and Burka or Burqa, was a political act used by Muslims to show that they did not want to integrate or intend to observe our laws by sending a message that their loyalty is only to Allah.'

And that is exactly why it is a problem. But it goes even deeper than Islamic arrogance. It also denigrates, whether they admit or know it, the Muslim female.

In the United States, Newsweek reported that the wearing of a hijab [or the headscarf] was on the increase among American born Muslim university students. The Saudi-financed Wahhabist front organisation CAIR [Council on American Islamic Relations], who has direct ties to Hamas and Hizbollah [party of God], legal advisor, Arsalan Ifhtikar declared that, 'The hijab is the walking symbol of Islam.' Again another open admission of Islamic bravado and supremacism.

In the UK the Burqa [a total head and body covering] has been barred from classrooms in the UK, and it is illegal in public places in five Belgian towns, and the Dutch legislature has banned it altogether. In Italy the country's 'Charter of Values, Citizenship and Immigration', calls face coverings unacceptable, though still not illegal. A courtroom in the United States has expelled a Burqa wearing women on the grounds that it affronted person recognition.


Wouldn't banning Muslim dress affront their 'religion'?

Yes and that is precisely the point. Islam is not a religion. It is a 3000 year old Arabian moon cult with all the attendant features that such a pagan savagery entails. It is ritualised, primitive, patriarchal and anti-modern. If scientology is not a religion than neither is a moon cult.

Western societies do not embrace paganism. Shamans are not allowed to run naked screaming down our streets covered by shamanistic body art because their ideology says they should do that. Druids and Wiccans don't float down our avenues wearing their neo-lithic garb and hair styles. There are numerous laws covering dress and undress. These laws were enacted to protect society and enforce some code of sartorial conformity. They also allow us to be civil, courteous, and amongst strangers, connected.

Within Europe and North America Islam has no natural law; human right or legal claim to be outside of Western culture and mores. Wearing a flowing bedsheet which covers the person is a direct statement of confrontation with the host society. It states boldly that they, the Islamic woman, rejects Western society. If you argue that this is freedom of choice than fine – it is society's freedom of collective choice to reject such supremacism and demand that the initiator take her attitude and her linen-wear, back to the home country. This is not Arabia.

Many Muslim women are forced to wear the bed room attire. A Montreal mosque has posted on its Web site a warning to the effect that if young girls took off their Hijab, they could end up getting raped and having 'illegitimate children.' Most Muslim girls are repeatedly told that if they take off their Hijab, they would cease to be Muslims: 'By removing your hijab, you have destroyed your faith. Islam means submission to Allah in all our actions.'

Therein lies the set of problems. Wearing the Muslim dress is not only anti-social and anti-Western, it is at its root, whether the female realises it or not, anti-female. It is a pathetic form of branding, denoting the woman as Allah's slave, and later in life, as the meat and property of her husband.

It is as crude a branding as the pokers used on cattle, or collars on a dog. By so branding a female, Muslim men ensure compliance to themselves and the cult of Allah; and importantly, they destroy the female sense of independence, free will and freedom of thought and choice. These fundamental values are at the core of Western society. Islam rejects them all. And so too does any woman who enjoys or feels empowered wearing a bed sheet. They are so utterly degenerated and foreign that no amount of multi-cult piety and love exists to reform what cannot be changed – namely, a mental and psychological derangement.

It is obvious why the Muslim bed sheet sartorial splendor needs to be abolished. It is a symbol of everything that is wrong with Islam and everything that Islam rejects from the West. Free will, natural law rights, transparency, openness, social liberation – these and more are soundly rejected by the Hijab covered female and her male oppressors.

Have you ever tried as an infidel pig, worthless in the eyes of the Hijab wearing Muslim female, to carry on a polite conversation ? Hello, how are you, nice bed sheet you have on today, glowing colors, you look fabulous, going out for a stroll in 35 C heat today are we ? Good luck with that. You are ignored. They don't even look you in the eye. They could care less if you were breathing or if you were on the ground skewered and bleeding. They would step around you and never look down. No help and no interest from the linen-people. Bed-room wear is almost pathologically an anti-social statement.

Whether the Muslim woman agrees with the above is immaterial. It is the greater society and culture which are put at risk by this morbid display of anti-Western hatred. We are the West, and we are superior. Muslim women, liberate yourselves and remove your bedsheets. If you can't, have a nice trip back to the greater Arabian empire. Take up your rights concerns in the land of your pagan Allah.