Should Ch4 Have Used This Woman In A Hijab

[trt]

to front the news of the Nice massacre?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1459893/why-did-channel-4-have-a-presenter-in-a-hijab-to-front-coverage-of-muslim-terror-in-nice/

[jim360]

A woman had a job to do. That woman did her job. That woman should clearly have been allowed to. I don't understand why it has taken 437 posts and counting to debate what should be a non-issue.

Indeed, I would have hoped that, even while entirely unintentional, it serves to send the message -- not that this should ever need repeating -- that while most terrorists in the world these days are Muslim, most Muslims in the world these days are not terrorists.

Also, lest we forget, the single biggest victory ISIS could score is if they can set Muslims against the world. Anyone who wanted to see this woman disappeared from news coverage of this story in that sense is playing right
into their hands. Don't.

[Khandro]

Just back on the block, and can't possibly read through this thread, but the main reason "this woman in a hijab" should not have been used, is that she is Ch 4's worst reporter, employed by them as a token.
Her wearing of the hijab gives a clear message that it symbolises a raft of opinions and an outlook not evident in what one might expect from a neutrally disposed reporter at any time, let alone in this circumstance.

[fiction-factory]

>Her wearing of the hijab gives a clear message that it symbolises a raft of opinions and an outlook not evident in what one might expect from a neutrally disposed reporter at any time, let alone in this circumstance.


I just think they can look very attractive

[vetuste_ennemi]

The point I've tried to make, Jim, is that Islam is a political ideology as well as a religion. The jihadists commit atrocities because they have a political agenda. Many Muslims who don't approve their methods support that agenda. ISIS, Al Qaeda etc. are in one way irrelevant. The agenda is as old as Islam and will survive the demise of ISIS.

[Ellipsis]

OK, just to end (hopefully) on a point of unity - here's the kind of Muslim we don't like, spotted when I was doing my Google image search many posts ago ...

https://plus.google.com/109244268551432080441/posts/eG1tmrGHSdk

[Khandro]

jim; //most Muslims in the world these days are not terrorists.//
A point put by another woman in a hijab, and one that Brigette Gabriel (whom God preserve), has an interesting view on;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAoXgZLRee0

[Togo]

Can we expect a ch4 newsreader wearing an overt symbol, of his or her religion, to report on the Munich shootings this evening? Say a cross or perhaps the star of David.

[andy-hughes]

Togo - //Can we expect a ch4 newsreader wearing an overt symbol, of his or her religion, to report on the Munich shootings this evening? Say a cross or perhaps the star of David. //

If that newsreader rostered on for today, and normally wears a religious symbol as part of their attire, then I for one would have no problem at all.

Others, on the basis of this thread - may wish to differ.

[Togo]

Remember when Jon Snow was picked up for not wearing a Remembrance Day poppy and said he did not wish to alienate sections of his listeners? Do you suppose that the people who supported his stance, are the same people who are applauding the wearing of a hijab to report a Muslim terrorist atrocity?

[Peter Pedant]

and now there is the German incident in munich

surely the reporter should be full of bullet holes and veez a strong Cherman accent - nein ?

and eef you think the situation is different
wy eez dat ?

[-Talbot-]

What The Funicular

[retrocop]

Now there is a poster who can teach Channel 4 News in sensitivity classes!!

[andy-hughes]

Togo - //Remember when Jon Snow was picked up for not wearing a Remembrance Day poppy and said he did not wish to alienate sections of his listeners? Do you suppose that the people who supported his stance, are the same people who are applauding the wearing of a hijab to report a Muslim terrorist atrocity? //

Who is 'applauding'?

There has been no 'applause' on here that I have read.

But again, the comparison doesn't fly.

Poppies are not part of everyday dress for any faith, and Mr Snow choosing not to wear one was his choice - in the same way that the Muslim journalist chose to wear her hijab.

Choice is the root of this debate, surely, and the queried intention that it should or should not be arbitrarily withdrawn?

Mr Snow made a choice, the journalist made a choice - that is the only aspect that links the two situations - no applause asked for, or given.

[Togo]

Ahh but of course some were praiseworthy of neither choice, and of course some gleefully applauded both.

[jim360]

I've seen that video before, Khandro; can't say I think much of her rant, to be honest, because -- well, where are the others speaking out? All over the place -- but some with an agenda choose to ignore that, it seems.

Today we have reports of yet another terrorist attack, of as yet unknown motivation, from Munich. Regardless of who it was, let it here be noted that the "Peaceful majority" were so very far from irrelevant. They opened their doors to provide refuge to those who needed it, and came together as far as is possible to aid the police and the community. Perhaps this will come as little comfort to those who died and their families, in Munich, in Nice, in Belgium, in Orlando, at the offices of Charlie Hebdo, at the Bataclan last year... too, too many to count. But it still provides no excuse to even countenance barring Muslim women from reading the news, in a hijab or otherwise.

[andy-hughes]

Togo - //Ahh but of course some were praiseworthy of neither choice, and of course some gleefully applauded both. //

I've turned my speakers right up, I still can't hear any 'applause' - can you post a link to it please?

[Svejk]

It must be nice to occupy the higher moral plane. To get to decide who can, indeed, should be offended. And, of course, who cannot.

[naomi24]

Jim, //where are the others speaking out? All over the place -- but some with an agenda choose to ignore that…..They opened their doors to provide refuge to those who needed it, and came together as far as is possible to aid the police and the community//

Or more accurately, some with an agenda choose to grossly exaggerate it. What a load of sentimental hogwash!

[jim360]

Perhaps. But it matters that mosques opened their doors to help those people in need of it. It is important to remember that. And it's vital not to characterise the many by the actions of the few. That is what "the few" want us to do. So we shouldn't do it.

The treatment this newsreader has received for just doing her job has been nothing short of disgusting.

[naomi24]

Jim, that the few are few is a fallacy. If only 1% of Muslims harbour some support or sympathy for radical Islam, that equates to 15 million people worldwide. Indications are that the figure is far higher. Save your disgust for that.