Prof. Mahfooz Kanwar: Niqabis are "brainwashed by their cultish male family members and those who are abused by their male custodians"

September 24, 2006
By Dr. Mahfooz Kanwar
The Calgary Sun

I once supported multiculturalism in Canada because I believed, at the time, it gave us a sense of pluralism, diversity, and a variety of cultural and social customs. However, multiculturism has encouraged a convolution of our culture.

One example of that convolution is the Muslim burka — a garment that covers women from head to toe, including their faces. Some even cover over their eyes with mesh. Over the years, I have appreciated the Canadian system of accommodating people from all corners of the world. At the same time, however, as a social scientist, I have been observing a clear lack of assimilation of newcomers to our culture.

As I have asserted many times before in my lectures, assimilation is not the same as integration.Integration means total conversion from one culture to another and complete amalgamation of subcultures into the culture at large. Assimilation, on the other hand, is a process of functional accommodation of various subcultures into the larger culture. In this process of functional accommodation, it is the responsibility of minority groups to functionally assimilate to the majority culture.

That is missing in today’s Canada.

The burka is just one example of the lack of assimilation. It is that trend that creates nations within a nation, and it certainly leads to divided loyalties. It is about time the majority in our society stood up and challenged our government to take a second look at official multiculturism in Canada. We need to remind our government it must pay serious attention to our policy of multiculturism, and to what it has done to our society.

For one thing, official multiculturalism has created ethnic ghettos in our major cities, and that has caused a major obstacle to our unity and undivided loyalty to our great nation. In our secular society, we do not mix religion and politics.Hence the question of the burka.

Perhaps the most infamous example of the burka is the mother and daughter of the admitted “al-Qaida family” — the Khadr family.Those two women are some of the most ungrateful “Canadians” who openly support terrorism and their disloyalty to Canada.

In my judgment, they should be charged with treason against Canada.Generally, there are two types of Muslim women who wear the burka. There are those who are brainwashed by their cultish male family members, and there are those who are physically abused by their male custodians to wear the burka. It is detailed in my book Journey to Success, fundamentalists are known to intimidate their wives into blindly following their husbands’ system of worship. Nevertheless, once those wives are coerced into religious fundamentalism, they become more zealous in their behaviour and actions.

I am not going to question the covered women in the Middle East. Women in that region have no choice because they are subjugated.That region is not secular, but Canada is a secular country where semiliterate Mullahs, who have probably never read a book of reason in their dim and miserable lives, intimidate female members of their faith. That should not be allowed in Canada. Most Muslims have been a silent majority within their community.

I am seeing signs the silent majority is slowly but surely rising up to challenge these little men with disheveled beards and head wraps.We can certainly look for some guidance from the French solution for this issue. In fact, the French action against the headscarf was supported by many Muslims in France and elsewhere. Muslim French girls have not abandoned schools in droves after the hijab was banned, for a secular public space gives all citizens civil rights and fundamental equalities.

While I am not in favour of outlawing people covering their hair, surely it should be outlawed to cover one’s face — the primary form of identifying one another?I believe in Islam very strongly, but not the Islam represented by semi-literate Mullahs and brain-washed Muslim women covered by the burka. I love to be in Canada. I pledge my loyalty to Canada, a secular country, where no religion should be allowed to interfere with our system, be it the social system or the criminal justice system. I want all old and new Canadians to pledge their loyalty to Canada.

I am not in favour of ethnic ghettos, and hyphenated Canadians.It does not matter to me how people used to do things or what social customs they followed where they came from. The burka has no place in secular Canada. The burka is one of the symbols of relatively new immigrants. Those immigrants who wear the burka justify their attire on the law of Islam, but the hijab and burka are not mandatory in Islam. Islamic injunctions simply call for Muslim women to guard their private parts, and to act with modesty.

They can do this without wearing the body cage.A great majority of the world’s Muslim women do not cover their hair or wear a burka except when in a mosque. Multiculturalism in Canada has allowed these, as well as other subcultural symbols and is one of the reasons for me to change my views about multiculturalism. We can no longer let multicultural illusions deface our cultural dress code and convolute our culture in Canada. The burka, in its own terms, turns women into sexual objects to be packed away out of sight. That should be stopped in Canada.


8 comments for “Prof. Mahfooz Kanwar: Niqabis are "brainwashed by their cultish male family members and those who are abused by their male custodians"

  1. Anonymous
    September 10, 2008 at 3:53 PM

    hey mr.
    u shouldnt talk if you do not know what you are talking about….there arent just two types of women that choose to wear the burka…its called a niqab by the way..and MANY actually A MAJORITY of women wear it because they choose to, yes, just like other women choose to wear booty shorts. Muslim women choose to hide their beauty from people who have no business seeing it…thank you very much. By the way, the burka doesn’t turn women into “sexual objects”as you say. Instead of talking so much…learn first, you seen very small minded from this..youre just mad, get over it…leave us alone like we leave you alone!!

    • joe
      October 14, 2016 at 4:25 AM

      The burka represents repretion of women , and koranderthal idiots are control freaks and islam needs to be ban in all civilived contries , END OF DISCUTION…

  2. Muslimah for life!
    February 4, 2009 at 9:39 AM

    number one we muslims follow sunnah. how prophet and his family lived. they were the best examples of muslims and allah commaneded after him we should obey the prophet and then our mothers.

    that means when the prophet SAW said women to wrap khimar (head covering) over their heads, and bossams that means cover up! not let everything show.
    you make a pathetic claim to know islam. yes in quran it says to lower our gaze and gaurd our private sand modesty. but thats haas meaning. the quran is methaphor in speakign why do you think we have scholars to tell us teh exact meanings.
    and in doing so the quran is expressed to us and its meaning told to us
    there is no dispute in the muslim world, with shiekhs, scholars imams etc that hijab is fard Compulsary! niqab is somehtign practiced by the prophets wives the best women on this earth. we should live by examples ot them.

    And majority of niqabies i see are reverts AKA used to be catholic canadian, english, american. not immigrants! get your facts right. you cnat see them so how do you know where they are from??
    You say all immigrants to go back home if they want to wear islamic clothes. fine but what about the hundrads of thousands of reverts who are white, american, canadian, english who werar full niqab and burqa??? are you going to kick them out too?
    our idea and way of thinking is backward, you are the one living in dark ages. want everyone to a pure breed of society all white, all naked for your preverted minds.
    you are the hitler of this time, and there will be many mroe like you.

    we are muslim women, and we are truely free to be women and be modest. you opprsse and subject your women as sex objects, pieces of meat. i feel sorry for them, i am free as a muslim. but you try and change me, you rob me of my human rights, my right to live, my right to be who i want to be, my right to be pious and modest. my right to be a equal based on my character.

    you call this democracy?? its anarchey, its opprssion its a dictated regim, full of hypocrites, injustice and misery.

    you dont want people to be themselves, you want robots to act, behave and dress as you want. what you feel is suitable. who are you to say what is the right way to dress?? whoa re you to say you are a true canadian? you forget you stole and raped america from the natives. if you tell people to leave immagrints liek yourself then you too must return to your native land and get out of canada.

    This is the typical double standards possesd by athiets. hypocrits and evil.

    live yoru life, and leave me to live mine. i want to wear hijab i want to wear niqab none of your god damn buisness. take a hike! get a life! and stop being so bloody evil!

  3. Asif
    February 10, 2009 at 6:22 PM

    I am a Muslim, and my sympathies are with the Muslims but we have to understand how the other side thinks if we are to co-exist with them and live in their society peaceably. After all, they have a valid point of view. Professor Kanwar seems very knowledgeable, and to me it seems apparent that he does in fact knows what he is talking about.

    Let’s face it: Canada is NOT, at least, in our popular understanding, a part of the Islamic world. Canada is a North American country with it’s own borders, language, and culture. The native populations have dwindled (unfortunate conquest, but let’s not forget that they were eventually recompensed), and the Anglo-French constitute the dominant component of Canadian society. Multiculturalism is a good thing, but when we are dealing with people who have the eventual goal of using democracy to undermine and destroy democracy, we are faced with a moral impetus to preserve democracy. The concern is that the non-Muslims fear an invasion of their country, in which they become subject to what they might perceive as oppression from a legal system which they view as out of place. Muslims if they want to live here should learn to integrate and assimilate into their societies. Canada was able to become a wealthy and productive nation because the immigrants were willing to assimilate (similarly to America).

    I feel sad to say it, but it is us Muslims who are the ones living in the Dark Ages. Some of us, like Mr. Kanwar, are enlightened however, and we can learn from them. Our lands are not unified, we are fragmented. Enough with victimisation, because we have earned a good deal of this shame. Some of us are jealous, and in our barbaric addiction to sado-masochism we want to destroy Western civilisation (ourselves included in the process) because we have lost the will to create. We were the ones who helped advance the Renaissance, but the Satanic stagnation of our understanding of the Islamic faith the last few decades has contributed to our pitiable state. Ideally, Muslim should go back to their countries and help modernise and reform their countries. Once we are done with our educations here, we should leave. That’s a duty in our faith (hijrah); it’s for our own good. Isn’t that from the Sunnah. Aren’t we being cursed by the Beloved Prophet (Salallahu Alaihai Wassalam) by living like cowards in the lands of non-Muslims. I am advising myself before I advise the others. How can we expect to impose our will on the West when we are ourselves in shambles in the East?

    For Allah’s sake, let’s adopt moderate forms of clothing. Hijab is required, niqab is mustahab (preferrable) as per Islamic jurisprudence. Let’s be the balanced nation we’re supposed to be. Why should we tax the tolerance of fairly understanding and liberal western societies for something that we can learn to live without. You can’t treat the Peoples of the Books as dhimmis if you are in their lands. That’s just not how it works. The tables have turned, and it’s that we learned to do in Rome as the Romans do (with some alteration, we can’t dump our creed). After all, we are contributing to our own oppression if we expect to take the right for our sisters to wear a face-veil for granted. Niqab is a beautiful thing (I deeply respect this wonderful sunnat of the Ummahat al-Mu’mineen), but that’s not going to work in Canada (or the West for that matter) because it might just happen to create a greater fitna (in the long run) than the good is bringing about (namely persecution, conflict, abuse, et cetera). Of course, this is one man’s opinion. As-Salaam ‘Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barkaathuhu to the Muslims, and my sincere wish of peace to the Non-Muslims.

  4. Anonymous
    June 16, 2009 at 2:02 PM

    This is a perfect example, of wanting live away from the rest of society. read the above posts. I like how people automatically jump to calling people evil by the way, nice touch…

  5. Anonymous
    October 10, 2010 at 8:59 AM


    Well said. It is you and Dr Kanwar whose writings sound like they were written with educated eloquence and sober reason, not appearances of illiteracy and emotionalism as the other commenters have done.

  6. Anonymous
    October 11, 2010 at 1:36 PM

    I think all human languages have a word called “courtesy,” and the respect for the culture of the host. This implies that a new immigrant must try to assimilate into the host culture, rather than erect artificial barriers of “niqab,” “hijab” and “that walking tent, burqa,” and telling whosoever objects to it, “leave us alone.”
    If they wanted to live that way, North America and Europe, a secular society, are the last countries to immigrate to. Saudi Arabia should have been the best. It is rich, viable kingdom, a centre of Islamic holy places, and above all all women in the kingdom are forced to wear “niqab,” not allowed to drive or vote, and can not go even for shopping unless accompanied by a male family member — a perfect place for “niqabi’s” and people who want to be left alone.
    For the lady who wants to follow the sunnah of the Prophet, I would suggest to her that Hadees literature originated during the times of Ummeyyids and Abbasids, when Hadees were invented to support their right to rule. During the 70 years of Ummeyyid, until the time of Umer bin Abdul Aziz, it was mandatory to curse from the pulpit the House of the Prophet. So, you can well imagine what kind of Islam and Hadees literature surived these 70 years.
    Above all, “niqab” is cultural pre-Islamic issue. In India even Hindu ladies observe it. So much for it being Islamic, and sunnah of the Prophet.
    No one can enslave a human mind, unless one really deserves it.

  7. Imran Sheikh
    August 23, 2014 at 7:31 AM

    Is there really an “our land” and “their land”? Does anyone really own land to the extent they can bar others from entering it? It is a accident of birth that you are born Canadian or Iran or Australian, or indeed Muslim or Hindu or Paris, and it follows that they have done nothing that gives them superior rights over others who enterfrom elsewhere. Therefore this presumption that immigrants owe their “hosts” an attempt at assimilation is debatable. However clearly the incomers move because they find the new place better than what they leave by their own standards.For that reason changing the new place to a mirror image of the one that left by refusing to adopt the new standards, which have created what they like, appears illogical. Certainly newcomers may keep their own identity intact if they wish, but only in a way that does not detract from the new system they have entered to the detriment of all.
    Also most newcomers come from intolerant regions. They must wholeheartedly commit to learning this in every matter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *