What's new

Sikh leader asked to remove turban in Rome: India calls Italian envoy

You can still hide an explosive under the Turban

It still conceals features that can be used to identify a person, like hair type.

I am not just talking about showing face. Showing face is mandatory at all airports including in Muslim countries, but head scarves have been taken off as well and in some case the entire Abaya.

The scanning machines can see through the turban to find a knife, for example. The radiation counter check will find a bomb within a turban. In this particular incident, it is reasonable to ask the Romans to show the due respect and find means to complete their security check without having to remove the turban. And, if all else fails, at least make provision for the turban to be removed in a private room. As a Sikh, it is our responsibility to educate those unaware, that removing the turban is no less than removing our clothes. It is not a hat. It is a deeply respected religious symbol. Sure, they may disregard our concerns and continue to show disrespect. But, remember, that also means they lose the privilege of being called educated, civil, and human.


Sikhs wear turban because our 10th ( and last ) Guru , Guru Gobind Singh told us to look distinct as his sons and daughters . Guru Gobind Singh himself wore a turban and since he is the Guru ( Prophet ) of Sikhs , it is considered important that followers look like prophet ( to follow him ) . "The turban is our Guru's gift to us. It is how we crown ourselves as the Singhs and Kaurs who sit on the throne of commitment to our own higher consciousness. For men and women alike, this projective identity conveys royalty, grace, and uniqueness. It is a signal to others that we live in the image of Infinity and are dedicated to serving all. The turban doesn't represent anything except complete commitment. When you choose to stand out by tying your turban, you stand fearlessly as one single person standing out from six billion people. It is a most outstanding act."





"Speaking to TOI over phone, Singh described the attitude of the security personnel at Rome airport as insensitive. He said when the staff asked him to remove his turban, he tried to tell them that this was not possible as it defied the teachings of Sikhism.

"But they refused to understand. We even offered that the staff could touch the turban on the head and run a metal detector over it to ensure that security was compromised. But they refused and did not allow us to take the flight," Singh said.


"We have reported the matter to the Indian embassy in Rome. There are around 40 gurdwaras in Italy and we were here to attend the International Sikh Dastar (Turban) Awareness Day at the invitation of the Sikh Channel (UK) at Cremona," he added.

A statement issued by DSGMC office in Delhi quoted Singh: "The Indian embassy in Rome intervened with the local officials and airport administration at the highest level but their efforts were unsuccessful. The Italian embassy in New Delhi and the Indian embassy in Rome had been informed about the visit of this delegation to Italy," Singh said.

The Italians insisted on removing the turbans despite having accepted it as a religious symbol in 2011. Italy had at that time declared that Sikhs will not have to remove their turbans at airports for security screening, after strong protests by Sikhs and the Indian government."

Sikh delegation told to remove turbans at Rome airport - Times Of India
 
.
Can it be done or not?

It has more space than an Hijab scarf which is usually just one thin layer of cloth wrapped tightly around the hair.

Why force Muslim women to remove the scarf but not the Turban?

Rather than arguments it'll be good if you can give some examples as well. Else the argument doesn't stand at all in a discussion and at some point becomes trolling. Lets
have an example from you where a woman has been asked to remove a headscarf(mind it not niqab). Lets have a link or 2 or share something.
 
.
Because a Sikh will not want to remove their turban in front of an audience- and why should they have to? It is a time consuming and awkward process to re-tie it so it makes sense to take them to a separate area.I've seen such sperate areas in the West for those needing further screening.

when it comes to issues of safety and security i dont think your argument of "too awkward" will be entertained

nor will it apply to anyone else who wears religious adornments

get used to it; things'll only get more complicated from hereon forth

You doesn't seems to understand aren't you... you can't understand the basis of recognition of women/men and here with the same rant so wasteful time.:disagree:

i dont see how his post was a rant rather than just reasoning

his point was that if something as thin as a hijab must be removed and checked then so must a turban
 
. .
How come we never hear of these Issues from those going to Japan, Chinese airports?

i think the EU countries have a set guideline for all member states' airport screening/security protocol.
 
.
@Abingdonboy dont you think govt is overreacting... I mean calling envoy? We usually do for some serious issues, not trivial ones.

Imagine Indian envoy is called for something trivial, we all will be livid.

Playing up the 'we are VIPs' trump is not uncommon in egoistic Indian politicians.

But the same scum governments won't do anything about the thousands of innocent Indians struggling and getting tortured in Saudi Arabia or some other country without their salaries or even proper meals per day.

Shows where our national priorities are.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
Why separate area? Why should the airport have to make extra arrangements for Sikhs?

Just throwing some of the arguments I've heard against Muslims when the same was suggested.

I understand you are talking of equality here, but you also do realize that 90% of the terrorism in the last decade has been done by Muslims right?

So why wont security be extra cautious regarding Muslims?
 
.
I understand you are talking of equality here, but you also do realize that 90% of the terrorism in the last decade has been done by Muslims right?

So why wont security be extra cautious regarding Muslims?

because majority of Muslims are not terrorists -- the same way majority of Sikhs dont/wont hide bombs under their turbans
 
.
I understand you are talking of equality here, but you also do realize that 90% of the terrorism in the last decade has been done by Muslims right?

So why wont security be extra cautious regarding Muslims?

What parts of the world we talking about? You got some sources?
 
.
I understand you are talking of equality here, but you also do realize that 90% of the terrorism in the last decade has been done by Muslims right?

So why wont security be extra cautious regarding Muslims?

It's a bitter truth. Handful people spoiling the name of whole community. I hate to agree with that.And that's the only reason of that extra bit of suspicion in the West.

because majority of Muslims are not terrorists -- the same way majority of Sikhs dont/wont hide bombs under their turbans

Very true!!
 
.
because majority of Muslims are not terrorists -- the same way majority of Sikhs dont/wont hide bombs under their turbans
And I am not one to dispute that majority of Muslims are not terrorists. That is completely true.

But the majority of terrorists are still Muslims. And that causes security agencies to be more alert and careful with Muslims. There are no two ways around this reality. Its not something cooked up in TSA's(or others) head.

What parts of the world we talking about? You got some sources?

You have got to be joking?
Look up the terrorism incidences from 2001 onwards in US/EU/India/Pakistan/Afghanistan and you have your answer.

Though I state again, majority of Muslims are NOT terrorists, but majority of terrorists are still unfortunately Muslims.
 
.
And I am not one to dispute that majority of Muslims are not terrorists. That is completely true.

But the majority of terrorists are still Muslims. And that causes security agencies to be more alert and careful with Muslims. There are no two ways around this reality. Its not something cooked up in TSA's(or others) head.



You have got to be joking?
Look up the terrorism incidences from 2001 onwards in US/EU/India/Pakistan/Afghanistan and you have your answer.

Though I state again, majority of Muslims are NOT terrorists, but majority of terrorists are still unfortunately Muslims.

Give me a source sir, you said 90% of terrorists are Muslims but the data does not add up. In Muslim majority countries sure but that is because usually 90%+ of the people are Muslims themselves however you will find that In Europe or the US for example that is not the case at all.
 
.
And I am not one to dispute that majority of Muslims are not terrorists. That is completely true.

But the majority of terrorists are still Muslims. And that causes security agencies to be more alert and careful with Muslims. There are no two ways around this reality. Its not something cooked up in TSA's(or others) head.

Sure. But at the same time (and regardless of their education levels) they have jobs to do and if a bomb or any other object that can cause harm or destruction can be hidden under an adornment then it makes sense to have them searched; a compromise can be made (i.e. have Sikh or Muslim or Jewish or whatever employees on site -- of both genders).

incidentally, a lot of Sikhs are often assumed to be Muslim -- so this is an issue of assumptions that we all will have to help resolve. No doubt a lot of profiling takes place - who said it doesnt.
 
.
Turbans are middle eastern headdresses. We should stop wearing them.
 
. .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom