Mustafa Nano: Muslims must fight the religion

I've been shot at ever seeing women in the streets of Tirana dressed in burkas, meaning head and foot. For those who do not know, the burka is the garment that covers the face of women. But I have to say that in Tirana, and in Albania, the stock is not very useful. Thank God. It is less useful than in some European countries. And therefore, in the West they have begun to ban its use. The last to issue a law prohibiting the use of the stock are the Danish. And there were among the Danish men that went out to protest against this law. There were also local Danish, I mean. Left, feminists, etc. This law is against human rights. In more concrete words, against women's rights to dress as they want”, he says.

According to him, Europeans who oppose the prohibition are naive.

For me, these Europeans who oppose the stock ban, at best they look naive, if not lesco. Because you should be if you believe that there are women who choose to cover themselves. There are no women who choose to cover themselves with burkas. There are women who choose themselves to believe in God, as there are men; but there are no women who choose to cover themselves up, leaving all that before their eyes open. And if a woman comes out and tells me that “yeah, I've decided myself to cover myself with bourse”, my answer would be: No, it's you who's convinced yourself that the decision is yours, but the decision is really your brainwasher's. It's like a suicide bomber, isn't it? Even a suicide bomber thinks he's the one who decides to blow himself up. But is there anyone who believes that?

According to him, the veil should be stopped.

But even if we agreed that there are women who decide to cover their faces, we should still stop these women from wearing burkas. And not in the name of protection of secularism, as the French have done, nor in the name of protecting the dignity of women who cover themselves. These women are so hot that their dignity is measured by the measure, in which they cover themselves, and in that sense it is their job to cover up. Let them stay in bed for the rest of their lives. But not in a public environment where people's right to look into their faces is violated. It seems to me that the right to look into everyone's face, in a public environment, has to be exposed to basic human rights. It's not called a fundamental right until now, but I think it should be called. And it would have to be formulated in the simplest way possible, in the formulations made in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “Everyone has a right to see each other's faces in a public environment”. And if it were up to me to make the word face a bigger formula, Everyone has a right to see another person's face in a public environment”.

According to Nanos, public space is meant to be a space where people look at each other. For him, the trunk is on the list of things that feed Islamophobic.

Western democracy can be defined in many ways, but one way would be to call it the civilization of facial exposure, of eye - to - eye communication. Public space is also always thought of as a space, where everyone sees each. Otherwise, it would not be called public space. A space where shadows and masks move could not be called public. And that's another reason the stock has to be stopped. On the streets, people who look like bank robbers or who look like mailboxes should not be allowed. So he called Boris Johnson in his writing to women who come out covered with burkas and nicotine. And rightly, I think. But a portion of the people in Great Britain, including Prime Minister May, surrounded him with pressure, and asked him to attract these qualities because they are insulting and promote Islamophobia. In fact, it's the opposite. On the list of things that feed Islamic burka is at the top. A woman with burka on the street has nothing to do with thinking of Islam. Therefore, the first must be Muslims themselves who have to fight the burka”, he said away.