On the evening of 3 December 1971, at about&nbsp;5:40 pm, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) launched surprise per-emptive strikes on eleven airfields in north-western India, including Agra, which was 300 miles (480 km) from the border. At the time of this attack, the Taj Mahal was camouflaged with a forest of twigs and leaves and draped with burlap because its marble glowed like a white beacon in the moonlight.

The marble&#39;s shine is less provocative these days, not because the structure decided to protest against the disparaging debate of why it could not be part of the state&#39;s tourism booklet but because it suffocates from the poor quality of&nbsp;debates on issues of air pollution. The debate is seasonal and the yearly trend is almost a decade old.

Even In 1942, during the World War II, Taj Mahal was covered in bamboo scaffolding as the British thought that the Taj Mahal was vulnerable to bombing by the German Luftwaffe bombers (and also the Japanese).

Taj Mahal, as a monument has fought against more than security threats and air pollution, its burqa is more than the coverage of twigs and bamboo. In the smog of political tussle and changing ideologies, it has on many occasion tugged to its burqa.

It almost tugged to its burqa when fictional novels questioned its existence and, based on sketchy facts, presented an alternate image of a temple which was converted to make place for the Taj. People agreed, not all although.

The Archaeological department installed a lab to check whether the city pollution and other pollutants were degrading the marble and its shine. To protect it, a mudpack solution was suggested. Wherein, the marble is polished by a certain mud. Rubbing mud and making it shiny. The deal is still on.

There is no research released on the gradual effect of time on the health of the Taj Mahal.

One of the wonders of the world, Taj Mahal often gazes at its nearest companion, the Mosque and tries to identify if anyone else is clad in similar shadow. When people walk by and look at the monument, whether the sense of belonging is national or anti-national. Whether such thoughts will make it leftist or something else.&nbsp;

The worlds largest democracy is trying to strengthen its defences and forces chose to look the other way as there was bounty announced on the head of the leading artist of a film named Padmavati.&nbsp;

Talking of safety and security, Pakistan government was ordered by a judicial review board to release Hafiz Saeed, the mastermind of 26/11. The US had announced a $10 million bounty for Saaed for his alleged role in the Mumbai terror attack.&nbsp;

The thunder and storm began as the air cleared a bit, the prediction says, the suffocation will subside.

Taj Mahal looked the other way towards Ayodhya now, its 06 Dec.

The burqa stays...

(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

The Taj Mahal is falling victim to chronic pollution and politicisation.

On the evening of 3 December 1971, at about 5:40 pm, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) launched surprise per-emptive strikes on eleven airfields in north-western India, including Agra, which was 300 miles (480 km) from the border. At the time of this attack, the Taj Mahal was camouflaged with a forest of twigs and leaves and draped with burlap because its marble glowed like a white beacon in the moonlight. The marble's shine is less provocative these days, not because the structure decided to protest against the disparaging debate of why it could not be part of the state's tourism booklet but because it suffocates from the poor quality of debates on issues of air pollution. The debate is seasonal and the yearly trend is almost a decade old. Even In 1942, during the World War II, Taj Mahal was covered in bamboo scaffolding as the British thought that the Taj Mahal was vulnerable to bombing by the German Luftwaffe bombers (and also the Japanese). Taj Mahal, as a monument has fought against more than security threats and air pollution, its burqa is more than the coverage of twigs and bamboo. In the smog of political tussle and changing ideologies, it has on many occasion tugged to its burqa. It almost tugged to its burqa when fictional novels questioned its existence and, based on sketchy facts, presented an alternate image of a temple which was converted to make place for the Taj. People agreed, not all although. The Archaeological department installed a lab to check whether the city pollution and other pollutants were degrading the marble and its shine. To protect it, a mudpack solution was suggested. Wherein, the marble is polished by a certain mud. Rubbing mud and making it shiny. The deal is still on. There is no research released on the gradual effect of time on the health of the Taj Mahal. One of the wonders of the world, Taj Mahal often gazes at its nearest companion, the Mosque and tries to identify if anyone else is clad in similar shadow. When people walk by and look at the monument, whether the sense of belonging is national or anti-national. Whether such thoughts will make it leftist or something else. The worlds largest democracy is trying to strengthen its defences and forces chose to look the other way as there was bounty announced on the head of the leading artist of a film named Padmavati. Talking of safety and security, Pakistan government was ordered by a judicial review board to release Hafiz Saeed, the mastermind of 26/11. The US had announced a $10 million bounty for Saaed for his alleged role in the Mumbai terror attack. The thunder and storm began as the air cleared a bit, the prediction says, the suffocation will subside. Taj Mahal looked the other way towards Ayodhya now, its 06 Dec. The burqa stays... (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Opinion: Pollution and politics through Taj Mahal's gaze

German lawmakers on Thursday approved a partial ban on the full-face burqa Islamic veil and a package of security measures aimed at preventing extremist attacks.

The new laws follow several jihadist attacks, including a truck rampage through a Berlin Christmas market that claimed 12 lives, and come ahead of September elections.

The new law on facial coverings falls short of a total ban in public places demanded by right-wing parties, like that in effect in neighbouring France since 2011.

The prohibition will apply to public servants -- including election officials, military and judicial staff -- performing their duties.&nbsp;

&quot;The state has a duty to present itself in an ideologically and religiously neutral manner,&quot; says the text of the law passed by the lower house in the evening.

Germany has since 2015 taken in more than one million migrants and refugees, most from predominantly Muslim countries.

This has stoked a xenophobic backlash and boosted the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany party, which has attempted to link the influx to a heightened threat of terrorism.

&#39;Limits of tolerance&#39;&nbsp;

Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere said the social integration of immigrants requires &quot;that we make clear and communicate our values and the limits of our tolerance to other cultures&quot;.&nbsp;

The ban on full facial coverings allows exceptions -- for example, for health workers protecting themselves against infections or police officers concealing their identity.

People can also be required to remove facial coverings in order to match them with their identity papers.&nbsp;

New security measures also include the use of electronic ankle bracelets, if approved by a judge, for people deemed a security threat, in federal police cases -- such as known Islamic radicals considered potentially violent by security services.

Another law paves the way for national and state police forces to pool their data in a new integrated IT system.

Under another new measure, Germany will implement EU rules on the exchange of flight passenger data to counter terrorism and serious crime.

And physical attacks on police, emergency services and military personnel on duty will in future be punished more severely, with up to five years&#39; jail. &nbsp;

The reforms follow the December 19 truck attack in Berlin claimed by the Islamic State group.&nbsp;The suspect, 24-year-old Tunisian national Anis Amri, was shot dead four days later by Italian police.

The Amri case sparked public anger after it emerged he had already been in the crosshairs of security services and should long ago have been sent back to Tunisia, which for months refused to take him.

National and state police and security services had monitored Amri for months, knowing that he had used multiple identities and addresses and had been in contact with radical Islamists.

(AFP)

German lawmakers have disallowed election officials, military and judicial staff from wearing the burqa to curb extremist attacks

German lawmakers on Thursday approved a partial ban on the full-face burqa Islamic veil and a package of security measures aimed at preventing extremist attacks. The new laws follow several jihadist attacks, including a truck rampage through a Berlin Christmas market that claimed 12 lives, and come ahead of September elections. The new law on facial coverings falls short of a total ban in public places demanded by right-wing parties, like that in effect in neighbouring France since 2011. The prohibition will apply to public servants -- including election officials, military and judicial staff -- performing their duties. "The state has a duty to present itself in an ideologically and religiously neutral manner," says the text of the law passed by the lower house in the evening. Germany has since 2015 taken in more than one million migrants and refugees, most from predominantly Muslim countries. This has stoked a xenophobic backlash and boosted the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany party, which has attempted to link the influx to a heightened threat of terrorism. 'Limits of tolerance' Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere said the social integration of immigrants requires "that we make clear and communicate our values and the limits of our tolerance to other cultures". The ban on full facial coverings allows exceptions -- for example, for health workers protecting themselves against infections or police officers concealing their identity. People can also be required to remove facial coverings in order to match them with their identity papers. New security measures also include the use of electronic ankle bracelets, if approved by a judge, for people deemed a security threat, in federal police cases -- such as known Islamic radicals considered potentially violent by security services. Another law paves the way for national and state police forces to pool their data in a new integrated IT system. Under another new measure, Germany will implement EU rules on the exchange of flight passenger data to counter terrorism and serious crime. And physical attacks on police, emergency services and military personnel on duty will in future be punished more severely, with up to five years' jail. The reforms follow the December 19 truck attack in Berlin claimed by the Islamic State group. The suspect, 24-year-old Tunisian national Anis Amri, was shot dead four days later by Italian police. The Amri case sparked public anger after it emerged he had already been in the crosshairs of security services and should long ago have been sent back to Tunisia, which for months refused to take him. National and state police and security services had monitored Amri for months, knowing that he had used multiple identities and addresses and had been in contact with radical Islamists. (AFP)

Germany prohibits public servants from wearing the burqa

Women in burqas and those wearing surgical masks should refrain from concealing their faces in public, the Philippine president&#39;s mayor daughter said Thursday, describing the measure as aimed at preventing attacks. 
 
Sara Duterte, mayor of Davao and daughter of firebrand leader Rodrigo Duterte, made the remarks as police hunt for the suspects -- seen on CCTV wearing face masks -- behind a bombing this month that killed 15 in the southern city. 
 
&quot;It would be a good security practice to disallow garments that cover the faces in public places,&quot; the mayor said in a written statement. 
 
&quot;These garments include hats, sunglasses, face masks, mouth masks, burqa, face paint, and other similar things.&quot; 
 
She said she understood the concerns of Muslim women who are required by their religion to cover up. 
 
&quot;May I suggest that you wear the hijab which shows your face or cooperate with the security personnel and show your face if you are wearing the burqa,&quot; the mayor said. 
 
Muslim women in the majority Catholic nation usually favour a hijab, which covers only the hair, over the face-concealing burqa, though it is growing in popularity.&nbsp; 
 
&quot;The general welfare of the majority takes precedence over religious tradition. While it is true that these garments are not disallowed by law, we discourage their use in public places,&quot; the mayor added. 
 
Surgical masks are commonly worn by commuters in Asian cities, to block out pollution, or sometimes to stop the spread of illness. 
 
Since the deadly blast in the bustling market in Davao on September 2, which led to the president declaring a &quot;state of lawlessness&quot;, the city has introduced checkpoints and armed security at key establishments. 
 
The government has blamed the attack on local Islamic militants. 
 
(AFP)

The mayor of Davao made the remarks as police hunt for suspects -- seen on CCTV wearing face masks -- behind a bombing this month

Women in burqas and those wearing surgical masks should refrain from concealing their faces in public, the Philippine president's mayor daughter said Thursday, describing the measure as aimed at preventing attacks. Sara Duterte, mayor of Davao and daughter of firebrand leader Rodrigo Duterte, made the remarks as police hunt for the suspects -- seen on CCTV wearing face masks -- behind a bombing this month that killed 15 in the southern city. "It would be a good security practice to disallow garments that cover the faces in public places," the mayor said in a written statement. "These garments include hats, sunglasses, face masks, mouth masks, burqa, face paint, and other similar things." She said she understood the concerns of Muslim women who are required by their religion to cover up. "May I suggest that you wear the hijab which shows your face or cooperate with the security personnel and show your face if you are wearing the burqa," the mayor said. Muslim women in the majority Catholic nation usually favour a hijab, which covers only the hair, over the face-concealing burqa, though it is growing in popularity. "The general welfare of the majority takes precedence over religious tradition. While it is true that these garments are not disallowed by law, we discourage their use in public places," the mayor added. Surgical masks are commonly worn by commuters in Asian cities, to block out pollution, or sometimes to stop the spread of illness. Since the deadly blast in the bustling market in Davao on September 2, which led to the president declaring a "state of lawlessness", the city has introduced checkpoints and armed security at key establishments. The government has blamed the attack on local Islamic militants. (AFP)

Show face to police, Muslims in Philippine city ordered

Three women were asked to deplane and questioned on the tarmac by police&nbsp;officers over allegations that they were Islamic State supporters. 
 
The three siblings - Maryam Dharas, 19, Sakina Dharas, 24, and Ali Dharas, 21&nbsp;- had boarded the flight from Stansted to Naples. 
 
The women, residents of north-west London, were interrogated for an hour by&nbsp;the police. 
 
Maryam later said that they were subjected to racial profiling. 
 
Before letting them go, Sakina was told that further background checks would&nbsp;be conducted. 
 
Maryam also said that she needed an apology. 
 
The airline insisted that security concerns had to be investigated, while the&nbsp;police offered no apology. 
 
The Dharas siblings, who are of Indian ethnic origin, were asked if they had&nbsp;Arabic text on their phones or copies of the Quran. 
 
A couple on the plane had reported that the sister were reading some Islamic&nbsp;State material on their phones.&nbsp; 
 
Sakina had a passport stamp from a visit to Iraq, where she had participated in a&nbsp;walk to raise funds for IS victims. 
 
The officers also asked Maryam to show her Twitter posts. 
 
(WION)

The three siblings said that they were made victims of racial profiling and demanded an apology

Three women were asked to deplane and questioned on the tarmac by police officers over allegations that they were Islamic State supporters. The three siblings - Maryam Dharas, 19, Sakina Dharas, 24, and Ali Dharas, 21 - had boarded the flight from Stansted to Naples. The women, residents of north-west London, were interrogated for an hour by the police. Maryam later said that they were subjected to racial profiling. Before letting them go, Sakina was told that further background checks would be conducted. Maryam also said that she needed an apology. The airline insisted that security concerns had to be investigated, while the police offered no apology. The Dharas siblings, who are of Indian ethnic origin, were asked if they had Arabic text on their phones or copies of the Quran. A couple on the plane had reported that the sister were reading some Islamic State material on their phones. Sakina had a passport stamp from a visit to Iraq, where she had participated in a walk to raise funds for IS victims. The officers also asked Maryam to show her Twitter posts. (WION)

Trio asked to deplane in London suspecting IS links

I had the experience of a lifetime this summer. As Delhi alternated between sweltering and stewing, I took off for my first Umrah (a pilgrimage to Mecca) with close family. &nbsp; 
 
I am a practising Muslim and consider myself devout, but no number of photographs or videos of this sacred journey can prepare you for the real experience.&nbsp; 
 
It was a revelation for me as I joined thousands of other devouts from across the globe circling the Kaaba, Islam&#39;s most sacred site. It is an experience in integration like no other when you walk in step with truly diverse humanity &ndash; one with millions. 
&nbsp; 
I had worn an abaya to the Kaaba for the Fajr (morning prayers), but all around me were women lost in private communion with Allah, a number of them wore normal clothes, like kurtas. The Umrah has a dress code known as Ihram: Men have to wear two white sheets covering the upper and lower body, but women can wear anything modest, with their hands and faces uncovered. &nbsp; 
 
In that moment of submergence, I had an epiphany as I glimpsed the faces of my fellow pilgrims, some awash in tears, others lost in silent prayers. I wondered why when we were indeed one and equal in the eyes of Allah and Holy Quran were rules so different for men and women when it came to clothes. &nbsp; 
 
As an adolescent, I have toyed with the idea of wearing an abaya, but never really took to it seriously. My family left it to my judgment when it came to my clothes. And I have always felt an abaya or hijaab is often used as an instrument for the oppression of women. It is oftentimes forced on women, whereas it must be a matter of their choice.&nbsp; 
 
Religion has played a very crucial role in shaping me as a person. I not only read the Quran frequently, but also take out time to pray. I also respect all other religions equally if not more. There is no sense of contradiction in this for me. But&nbsp;when Islam has given Muslim women the right to choose a spouse, why not give the right to dress how they like? 
&nbsp; 
At a time when Muslim women&#39;s rights collectives have long been campaigning against practices like instant triple talaq and polygamy in India, I choose to write about women&#39;s right to choose what they wear. Mainly because I have always felt strongly about it. &nbsp; 
I am a proud Muslim. Not just because I am born into the faith, but because of what I feel, as a woman, is its most liberating and progressive feature. My religion considers me at par with any man. The current discourse &ndash; both liberal and conservative &ndash; may give a different impression, but for me, the message in the Holy Quran is loud and clear. &nbsp; 
 
This verse from the Holy Quran spells it out: &quot;O you who believe! You are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should you treat them with harshness, that you may take away part of the dowry you have given them - except when they have become guilty of open lewdness. On the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If you take a dislike to them, it may be that you dislike something and Allah will bring about through it a great deal of good.&quot; [Quran 4:19] 
&nbsp; 
And this is not the only verse from the Holy Quran that shines with egalitarian spirit -- Islam is all for gender equality. Why then these stringent requirements for women followers of the faith to cover up their bodies with an abaya, hijab or burkha?&nbsp; 
 
I am a Muslim by birth and I am proud of it. Please do not get me wrong. The fact is, most Muslim women I know are not only very accepting of the abaya and hijab, they also believe that this is the only way to dress modestly. Most of my grandmother&#39;s generation would know no other way. They were conditioned to believe this, unquestionably, from a young age. 
 
My argument is simple, if women are expected to adhere to certain rules, shouldn&#39;t men do the same? 
&nbsp;&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

When Islam has given Muslim women the right to choose a spouse, why not give the right to dress how they like?

I had the experience of a lifetime this summer. As Delhi alternated between sweltering and stewing, I took off for my first Umrah (a pilgrimage to Mecca) with close family. I am a practising Muslim and consider myself devout, but no number of photographs or videos of this sacred journey can prepare you for the real experience. It was a revelation for me as I joined thousands of other devouts from across the globe circling the Kaaba, Islam's most sacred site. It is an experience in integration like no other when you walk in step with truly diverse humanity – one with millions. I had worn an abaya to the Kaaba for the Fajr (morning prayers), but all around me were women lost in private communion with Allah, a number of them wore normal clothes, like kurtas. The Umrah has a dress code known as Ihram: Men have to wear two white sheets covering the upper and lower body, but women can wear anything modest, with their hands and faces uncovered. In that moment of submergence, I had an epiphany as I glimpsed the faces of my fellow pilgrims, some awash in tears, others lost in silent prayers. I wondered why when we were indeed one and equal in the eyes of Allah and Holy Quran were rules so different for men and women when it came to clothes. As an adolescent, I have toyed with the idea of wearing an abaya, but never really took to it seriously. My family left it to my judgment when it came to my clothes. And I have always felt an abaya or hijaab is often used as an instrument for the oppression of women. It is oftentimes forced on women, whereas it must be a matter of their choice. Religion has played a very crucial role in shaping me as a person. I not only read the Quran frequently, but also take out time to pray. I also respect all other religions equally if not more. There is no sense of contradiction in this for me. But when Islam has given Muslim women the right to choose a spouse, why not give the right to dress how they like? At a time when Muslim women's rights collectives have long been campaigning against practices like instant triple talaq and polygamy in India, I choose to write about women's right to choose what they wear. Mainly because I have always felt strongly about it. I am a proud Muslim. Not just because I am born into the faith, but because of what I feel, as a woman, is its most liberating and progressive feature. My religion considers me at par with any man. The current discourse – both liberal and conservative – may give a different impression, but for me, the message in the Holy Quran is loud and clear. This verse from the Holy Quran spells it out: "O you who believe! You are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should you treat them with harshness, that you may take away part of the dowry you have given them - except when they have become guilty of open lewdness. On the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If you take a dislike to them, it may be that you dislike something and Allah will bring about through it a great deal of good." [Quran 4:19] And this is not the only verse from the Holy Quran that shines with egalitarian spirit -- Islam is all for gender equality. Why then these stringent requirements for women followers of the faith to cover up their bodies with an abaya, hijab or burkha? I am a Muslim by birth and I am proud of it. Please do not get me wrong. The fact is, most Muslim women I know are not only very accepting of the abaya and hijab, they also believe that this is the only way to dress modestly. Most of my grandmother's generation would know no other way. They were conditioned to believe this, unquestionably, from a young age. My argument is simple, if women are expected to adhere to certain rules, shouldn't men do the same?

If Muslim men start wearing abaya, I will too

burqa

Burqa, News on Burqa, stories on Burqa, articles on Burqa, Burqa stories at Wion, Burqa news, Burqa latest news