Saturday, October 21, 2006

October 21, 2006

Police to avoid Ramadan arrests

From the BBC with thanks to Kaspar

Police in Manchester have been told not to arrest Muslims wanted on warrants at prayer times during Ramadan.Greater Manchester Police confirmed it had asked detectives not to make planned arrests during those periods for reasons of religious sensitivity.The advice was emailed out to officers working in Moss Side, Hulme, Whalley Range, Rusholme, Fallowfield, Ardwick, Longsight, Gorton and Levenshulme.Police said it was not a blanket ban, just a "request for sensitivity".The email stressed the order did not apply to on-the-spot arrests, only the execution of arrest warrants. I assume no arrest warrants are ever executed on Christmas Eve either.


A disgusting end to a disgusting country.

A year later, France fears renewed unrest
By Elaine Sciolino and Ariane Bernard The New York Times
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2006-->Published: October 20, 2006

EPINAY-SUR-SEINE, France When the call came about a car burglary in this raw suburb north of Paris one night last weekend, three officers in a patrol car rushed over, only to find themselves surrounded by 30 youths in hoods throwing rocks and swinging bats and metal bars. Neither tear gas nor stun guns stopped the assault. Only when reinforcements arrived did the siege end. One officer was left with broken teeth and in need of 30 stitches to his face.

The attack was rough but not unique. In the past three weeks alone, three similar assaults on the police have occurred in these suburbs that a year ago were aflame with the rage of unemployed, undereducated youths, most of them the offspring of Arab and African immigrants. In fact, with the anniversary of those riots approaching in the coming week, spiking statistics for violent crime across the area tell a grim tale of promises unkept and attention unpaid. Residents and experts say that fault lines run even deeper than before and that widespread violence could flare up again at any moment.

"Tension is rising very dramatically," said Patrice Ribeiro, the deputy head of the Synergie-Officiers police union. "There is the will to kill." The anger of the young is reflected in the music popular in the suburbs. In her latest album, the female rap singer Diam's accuses Interior Minister Nicholas Sarkozy of being a "demagogue" and the police of hypocrisy. The rapper Booba proclaims that "Maybe it would be better to burn Sarko's car," while Alibi Montana, another rapper, warns Sarkozy, "Keep going like that and you're going to get done."

Next Friday is the one-year anniversary of the electrocution death of two teenagers as - rumor had it - they were running from the police in the Paris suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois. The tragedy triggered three weeks of violence in which rioters throughout France torched cars, trashed businesses and ambushed police officers and firefighters, plunging the country into what President Jacques Chirac called "a profound malaise."

Last month, a leaked law enforcement memo warned of a "climate of impunity" in Seine-Saint-Denis, the notorious district north of Paris, where clusters of suburbs like Clichy-sous- Bois and Epinay-sur-Seine are located. It reported a 23 percent increase in violent robberies and a 14 percent increase in assaults in the district of 1.5 million people in the first half of 2006, complaining that young, inexperienced police officers were overwhelmed and that the court system was lax. Only one of 85 juveniles arrested during the unrest had been jailed,it added.

In all of France, according to the Ministry of Interior, 480 incidents of violence against the police were recorded in September, a 30 percent increase from the month before. On the other side of the debate, however, local officials and residents are disheartened that the shock of the unrest last year did not trigger a coherent plan to create more jobs, better housing and education and more social services - or even to raise the consciousness of the citizenry.

"Ours is a population that truly has been abandoned to its sad fate," said Claude Dilain, the mayor of Clichy- sous-Bois and a local pediatrician who recently wrote a book about the plight of his town. "French society wants the poor to be squeezed into ghettos rather than have them living right next door. It says, 'Put the poor out there in the suburbs, but avoid violence at all costs so that all goes well and we don't have to talk about them anymore.' Our people feel betrayed. All the conditions are there for it to blow up again."

Clichy-sous-Bois is worse off than many other suburbs. It has no local police station, no movie theater, no swimming pool, no unemployment office, no child welfare agency, no metro or inter- urban train into the city. For even some of the most crime-ridden suburbs, it is a 20-minute ride into central Paris; for Clichy-sous-Bois, depending on whether there is space on the bus, it can take an hour and a half. Unemployment is at 24 percent, and much higher among young people. Thirty-five percent of the population consists of foreigners, many non- French-speaking.

The town's only municipal gymnasium and sports center was burned during the unrest last year. When Nadia Boudaoud, a 27-year-old part-time educator, was asked why her family moved from Clichy-sous-Bois two years ago, she gave three reasons: the noise, the garbage and the rats. But on the same evening that young people were attacking the police in Epinay-sur-Seine a few dozen kilometers away, Clichy-sous-Bois's only cultural space held the kind of special event they have in places like Paris: the opening of an ambitious photo exhibit about daily life in the town of 23,000 people.
The exhibit featured the works of a dozen world-renowned photographers, including Marc Riboud, William Klein and Sarah Moon, who mingled with hundreds of local residents. Visitors were met at the entrance with a long white panel bearing the photos of the two teenage electrocution victims, Bouna Traore, 15, and Zyed Benna, 17.

The one disappointment of the evening, Dilain said, is that not one French official showed up. "It is symptomatic of the absence of interest in us," he said. "I'm ashamed for France." Indeed, interviews with residents and officials in several suburbs ringing Paris in recent weeks made it clear that many are convinced that the government's main interest in them is to maintain security in advance of the presidential election next spring.

Sarkozy, the front-runner for the nomination of the governing center- right party, has staked his reputation on an uncompromising attitude toward young offenders. But his increase in the number of police officers in the suburbs - many of them from far-away parts of France - has meant more harassment and random searches of young people, fueling complaints of unfairness. Not to be outdone, the front-runner for the Socialist Party, Ségolène Royal, has offered her own proposals to curb youth violence, including military-led training programs to deal with young offenders and parenting school for parents of unruly primary school children.

Clearly, the French favor a tough line on security issues. According to an Ifop poll for Le Figaro published last month, 77 percent said that the judicial system was not harsh enough against young offenders. After the unrest last fall, the government announced measures to improve life in the suburbs, including extra funds for housing, schools and neighborhood associations, and counseling and job training for unemployed youths. None have gone very far.

New legislation promoting the "equality of chances" passed with much fanfare last March largely has been ineffectual. An initiative to create blue- collar apprenticeships for teenagers from the age of 14, has been criticized for removing children from the universal educational system at early an age. Another law aimed at curbing illegal immigration - and deporting youthful offenders - ignored the fact that most suburban youth are French, and a law to spur youth employment was abandoned following massive street demonstrations against it last spring.

The government said this week that it needed more "experimentation" before implementing the law requiring corporations with more than 50 employees to use anonymous résumés aimed at curbing discrimination against job-seekers with foreign-sounding names from troubled neighborhoods. In any case, many young job-seekers and community activists consider the initiative gimmicky, even humiliating. "We have to fight discrimination - not disguise differences as if differences are a crime," said Samir Mihi, a founder of ACLEFEU, an association created in Clichy-sous-Bois to promote the suburbs.

In an exercise that aims to celebrate the identity of the applicant, APC, another organization, has created a project - the videotaped résumé - that trains job-seekers how to sell themselves on camera. At a training and taping session in the Paris suburb of Nanterre this week, Mariama Goudyaby, 33, said that she has been looking for a job as a receptionist for six months, but has been turned down 15 times.

"When I come, they see, 'she is black,'" she said. "And then they say, 'We've already found somebody.'" With the video, she said defiantly, "You like me; it's me. You don't like me, too bad." Certainly, there have been changes since last year, though many of them seem symbolic or cosmetic. The television channel TF1, for example, assigned Harry Roselmack, a 33- year-old black journalist of French Caribbean descent, to anchor the main evening news for six weeks this summer, the first time a Frenchman of color has served in that role. He became an overnight sex symbol and national hero.

The Henry IV public high school, one of the best in Paris, in September recruited thirty students from underprivileged backgrounds for its preparatory program that feeds some of France's most elite universities. Marking anniversaries is deeply embedded in French tradition, so a number of events are scheduled in the run-up to Oct. 27. At a town meeting in the suburb of Aulnay-sous-Bois on Wednesday, some speakers worried aloud about the street chatter they are hearing from young people about how best to "celebrate" it.

"The most violent of them think of it in terms of a celebration," said Franck Cannarozzo, a deputy mayor of Aulnay- sous-Bois. "For them last year was a victory over authority." But for a 25-year-old man who lives in Clichy-sous-Bois and asks to be called Karim, the day will be one of mourning, not celebration. Karim had been showing the two teenagers how to play a new video game in the basement of his building the night before they were electrocuted.

"It is the anniversary," he said, "of a death."

Thursday, October 19, 2006

How French TV fudged the death of Mohammed Al Durah.
Camera Obscuraby Richard Landes Only at TNR Online Post date 10.17.06

Discuss this article (49)

Printer friendly

E-mail this article
In September 30, 2000, images of 12-year-old Mohammed Al Durah and his father--cowering behind a barrel at Netzarim Junction, in the Gaza Strip--circulated globally, along with a claim that they had been the targeted victims of Israeli fire. If Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount two days earlier had sparked riots, these images triggered all-out war. The ensuing horror and outrage swept away any questions about its reliability. Indignant observers dismissed any Israeli attempt to deny responsibility as "blaming the victim."
But, by 2002, two documentaries--one German, one French--raised troubling questions. The raw footage from that day reveals pervasive staging; no evidence (certainly not the most widely circulated tape offers evidence of Israeli fire directed at the barrel, much less of Israelis targeting the pair; given the angles, the Israelis could scarcely have hit the pair at all, much less 12 times (indeed the only two bullets that hit the wall above them came from the Palestinian side, inexplicably 90 degrees off target); there was no sign of blood on the ground where the father and son reportedly bled for 20 minutes; there was no footage of an ambulance evacuation or arrival at the hospital; there was no autopsy; and none of the dozen cameraman present filmed anything that could substantiate the claim that the father and son had been hit, much less that the Israelis had targeted them. These documentaries had limited exposure, in part thanks to France2's refusal to run the one by a sister station in Germany. But they did spark a demonstration in Paris outside the France2 offices by citizens outraged to discover that so horrendous an image may well have been a fake.
The demonstrations apparently ruffled feathers. Some writers lambasted France2's coverage--most prominently Philippe Karsenty, who called for Al Durah beat chief Charles Enderlin and France2 chief Arlette Chabot to resign, and, in response, Enderlin and France2 itself--using the same law invoked against Emile Zola in the Dreyfus Affair--have accused three critics (including Karsenty) of "striking at their honor and respectability."

Now, four years later, the lawsuits are finally coming to trial in Room 17 of the Palais de Justice in Paris. The three suits (one for each defendant) come in rapid succession--September 14, October 26, and November 30--with judgments four weeks following each hearing. And, in at least two of the trials, I, a medieval historian, have been asked to testify.

I have become involved for two reasons. First of all, I noted almost immediately that Palestinians and anti-Zionists, insisting that Israel killed the boy on purpose, used Al Durah in a way familiar to medievalists--as a blood libel. This was the first blood libel of the twenty-first century, rendered global by cable and the Internet. Indeed, within a week, crowds the world over shouted "We want Jewish blood!" and "Death to the Jews!". For Europeans in particular, the libelous image came as balm to a troubled soul: "This death erases, annuls that of the little boy in the Warsaw Gherro," intoned Europe1 editorialist Catherine Nay. The Israelis were the new Nazis.
And second, when I saw the raw footage in the summer of 2003--especially when I saw the scene Enderlin had cut, wherein the boy(allegedly shot in the stomach, but holding his hand over his eyes) picks up his elbow and looks around--I realized that this was not a film of a boy dying, but a clumsily staged scene.
On October 31, 2003, at the studios of France2 in Jerusalem in the company of Charles Enderlin and his Israeli cameraman, I saw the raw footage of Al Durah from the only Palestinian cameraman who actually captured the scene on film--footage France2 still refuses to release for public examination. I was floored. The tapes feature a long succession of obviously faked injuries; brutal, hasty evacuation scenes; and people ducking for cover while others stand around. One fellow grabbed his leg in agony, then, upon seeing that no one would come to carry him away, walked away without a limp. It was stunning. That was no cameraman's conspiracy: It was everyone--a public secret about which news consumers had no clue.
But the real shock came when I mentioned this to Enderlin, who said he trusted this cameraman. "They always do that," he said. "It's a cultural style." So why wouldn't they have faked Al Durah? "They're not good enough," he said. A year later, the higher-ups at France2 made the same remark to three French journalists who also noted the pervasive staging: "You know well that it's always like that," they said.
I tried unsuccessfully to interest the mainstream press in this obvious fakery, but nobody was interested. "I don't know how much appetite there is for this material here," one person at a major studio told me. So I made Pallywood (Palestinian Hollywood)--a video-essay showing the dishonesty and the still-more-astounding Western complicity in using this footage to inform us about the Middle East. Then I made a follow-up, Al Durah: The Making of an Icon (and soon, Icon of Hatred). I established a website, The Second Draft, where I posted the movies along with my evidence so that, unlike France2, people could check my sources. And now the accused have asked me to testify.

Why did they want me? In trying to dismiss my first testimony, the plaintiff's lawyer wondered, "what does he know about images? He's a medievalist." Well, I know about the power of images, of narratives, and of forgeries, and especially blood libels. And, since my first book, Relics, Apocalypse, and the Deceits of History, was about a set of forgeries that continued to fool historians for decades even after a critic revealed them as fakes in the 1920s, I also know something about the difficulty of getting specialists to acknowledge they were duped.
But this image goes beyond blood libel and anti-Semitism, beyond blackening Israel's image and whitewashing Palestinian violence. Al Durah became the icon not only of the Intifada, but of global jihad. Within months of the incident, bin Laden came out with a recruiting video that featured extensive Pallywood footage and highlighted Al Durah. Months later, Pakistani jihadis killed Daniel Pearl, interweaving Al Durah's image into their tape of the execution.
In 2000, anyone told of Muslim plans to Islamicize the West laughed with scorn. It was the least of Western worries. Today, some have already given up Europe for lost; others see it in the balance; and others are finally awakening with shock to the radical shift in the balance of forces. And every aspect of l'affaire Al Durah is emblematic of why: from the Palestinian forces that staged it; to the Western mainstream press and the NGOs that presented it as news without asking hard questions (and that believed any subsequent Palestinian claims of Israelis killing children and resisted efforts at correction); to the Muslim world that turned it into an icon of hatred and a call to genocidal holy war; to the "leftist" revolutionaries who jumped on the jihad bandwagon in Durban, South Africa; to a public distressingly eager for "dirt" on Israel and unaware of the forces empowered by diffusing such poisons.
Three court trials, then--in which France2 seeks to bury any serious assessment of their coverage--are also trials of France's ability to defend her republican values against an Islamist onslaught that it seems ill-equipped to resist. And, as France goes, so goes Europe. (Would France have it any other way?)

The plaintiff at the first trial, on September 14, was Philippe Karsenty of Media-Ratings, the boldest of France2's critics. No one from France2 showed up. Its solitary lawyer had no witnesses, no questions for Karsenty's witnesses, and no comments about the evidence damning her clients. Her summation insisted on France2's honor and reputation, offered a letter of praise from President Jacques Chirac, and cast aspersions on the defense's witnesses.
Then the procureur de la republique (a court-appointed officer charged with assessing the case in the interests of civil society) gave her nonbinding opinion. She rebuked France2 for not addressing the evidence, for not showing their raw footage, and for not even showing up in court. She further admitted that, although Karsenty had impugned Enderlin's and France2's reputations, he had offered enough evidence to make such assertions a legitimate part of public discourse. Judgment on Karsenty's case is Thursday. Next trial: October 26. So far, the best coverage--surprise!--comes from the blogosphere.
Richard Landes , medieval history professor at Boston University, established and blogs at He is the author of Heaven on Earth: The Varieties of the Millennial Experience (forthcoming).

Wednesday, October 18, 2006
SFC(R)L & Dork NRG PWNED all day all night
Nice job guys. Your're elite

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Meet the new Boss ...Same as the old Boss

New J'lem Mufti endorses suicide bombers
New Grand Mufti of Jerusalem hints that Palestinians have right to resist occupation by any means

On October 15, The Media Line news agency conducted an exclusive interview with the newly appointed Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and the Palestinian Lands Sheikh Muhammad Ahmad Hussein. During the interview the mufti said he endorsed the phenomenon of the suicide bombers, as it was part of the Palestinian people's legitimate resistance.

The post of the grand mufti was never reduced to merely delving into religious issues. In the 1940s the grand mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin Al-Husseini, was the most powerful and influential leader of the Palestinians. Politics and religion were completely mixed back then, and Al-Husseini was considered a political leader as much as he was a religious one.,7340,L-3316183,00.html
Like Duh
Islam is the most Warlike religion
A Danish language researcher has spent over three years analyzing the original texts of ten different religions, and concludes that the Islamic texts stand out by encouraging terror and violence to a larger degree than other religions do. Four years after the terror attacks at the World Trade Center, Danish linguist Tina Magaard presents an analysis that questions Islam’s relationship with terror, violence and Holy War.

Islamic texts encourage terror and fighting to a far larger degree than the original texts of other religions, concludes Tina Magaard. She has a PhD in Textual Analysis and Intercultural Communication from the Sorbonne in Paris, and has spent three years on a research project comparing the original texts of ten religions.

“The texts in Islam distinguish themselves from the texts of other religions by encouraging violence and aggression against people with other religious beliefs to a larger degree. There are also straightforward calls for terror. This has long been a taboo in the research into Islam, but it is a fact that we need to deal with," says Tina Magaard. Moreover, there are hundreds of calls in the Koran for fighting against people of other faiths. “If it is correct that many Muslims view the Koran as the literal words of God, which cannot be interpreted or rephrased, then we have a problem.

It is indisputable that the texts encourage terror and violence. Consequently, it must be reasonable to ask Muslims themselves how they relate to the text, if they read it as it is," says Tina Magaard.The Copenhagen imams Ahmed Abu Laban and Abdul Wahid Petersen are greatly upset by the analysis presented by the linguist. Abu Laban: “I don’t want to confine myself to a single stupid, prejudiced and dishonest researcher. Why waste time on somebody who wants to create twisted ideas about Islam?” Abdul Wahid Petersen calls the analysis ”academic nonsense":
”You cannot single out quotes and conclude the way she does. Most verses in the Koran should be viewed within a specific historical context and cannot be generalized. If there are so many calls for violence,
then why haven’t Muslims wiped out people of different faiths in the societies where Muslims make up the majority? Because we do not read the Koran that way.”

Afghan Jew Becomes Country's One and Only
A Single Death in Kabul Cuts Community in Half
By N.C. AizenmanWashington Post Foreign ServiceThursday, January 27, 2005; Page A10
KABUL, Afghanistan, Jan. 26 -- When Zablon Simintov found Ishaq Levin sprawled on the cement synagogue floor last week, he immediately realized two things: His housemate and archnemesis of nearly seven years was dead, and he was now in all likelihood the last Afghan Jew still living in the country.
"I'm not sad about that," Simintov said with a frown Wednesday. He acknowledged dryly that he would not miss Levin, an octogenarian who apparently died of natural causes. Simintov, 44, had feuded bitterly with him for as long as the two men occupied separate rooms in the ruins of the only remaining synagogue in Kabul.

Sunday, October 15, 2006

My 'Note" to Mr North
What a wasted opportunity .
You had a chance to speak the truth about jihad , you became a mouthpiece for jihad.
All you have to due is read the Quran hadith and Al sira to know Islam is jihad jihad is terrorism. Did any one tell you this?
You can find it in the Quran at the library .
Noble Qur’an 2:190 Footnote: “Jihad is holy fighting in Allah’s Cause with full force of numbers and weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars. By Jihad Islam is established, Allah’s Word is made superior (which means only Allah has the right to be worshiped), and Islam is propagated. By abandoning Jihad Islam is destroyed and Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim. He who tries to escape from this duty, or does not fulfill this duty, dies as a hypocrite.”

The passage itself can be found in two places. It is on page 39 of the Noble Qur’an translation by Muhammad Khan and distributed by “King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an—The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques. It is a footnote to Qur’an 2.190 and is designed to explain Jihad according to Allah as this is the first time the word is used.
And it can be found on page 580 of the Islamic University of Medina’s translation of Sahih al-Bukhari’s Hadith. There it opens Bukhari’s Book of Jihad.

In both cases, the Islamic scholars are condensing Allah’s and Muhammad’s teachings on Jihad to a single paragraph.
You interviewed B Lewis the world renowned islamophilc apologist who can find no fault in any part of Islam. Why not Robert Spencer or Craig Winn?
You might as well had David Forte stand up there . His lies will kill more people than OBL.
You are a dangerous fool Im done with you
Re: Vlog #9: Who Hijacked Islam??! by Baba Ali ummahfilms

just cant put it down

Christian BA employee to take legal action over suspension for wearing cross
A committed Christian said today she planned to take legal action against her employers British Airways after the airline ruled that displaying her crucifix breached uniform rules
Heathrow check-in worker Nadia Eweida was sent home after refusing to remove the crucifix which breached BA's dress code.
Her treatment by BA - which styles itself as the "world's favourite airline" - brought condemnation both from Christian groups and members of other faiths last night.
BA's chief executive Willie Walsh has upheld the action against Miss Eweida for failing to comply with "uniform regulations" despite himself coming under fire recently for failing to wear a tie.
Miss Eweida, who has an unblemished record during seven years at BA, is suing her employer for religious discrimination after being suspended from work without pay for two weeks.
She said her treatment was all the more extraordinary as she and fellow employees had just undergone "diversity training" - including receiving advice from pressure group Stonewall on how to treat gays and lesbians in the workplace.
The airline's uniform code states that staff must not wear visible jewellery or other 'adornments' while on duty without permission from management.
It makes exceptions for Muslim and Sikh minorities by allowing them to wear hijabs and turbans.
Under rules drawn up by BA's 'diversity team' and 'uniform committee', Sikh employees can even wear the traditional iron bangle - even though this would usually be classed as jewellery - while Muslim workers are also allowed prayer breaks during work time.
But Miss Eweida, 55, from Twickenham, insisted her cross, which is smaller than a ten pence piece, was not jewellery but an expression of her deep Christian faith.
She questioned why she was being forced to hide her religion when BA's Muslim and Sikh workers could express theirs.
Miss Eweida said last night: "I will not hide my belief in the Lord Jesus. British Airways permits Muslims to wear a headscarf, Sikhs to wear a turban and other faiths religious apparel.?
"Only Christians are forbidden to express their faith. I am a loyal and conscientious employee of British Airways, but I stand up for the rights of all citizens."
Her case comes at a time of intense debate over the rights of individuals to express their belief - following Jack Straw's call for Muslim women to remove their veils.
Earlier this month it emerged BBC governors had agonised over whether newsreader Fiona Bruce should wear a small cross on a chain around her neck while on air in case it might cause offence by suggesting a religious affiliation.
Miss Eweida, a Coptic Christian whose father is Egyptian and mother English, was ordered to remove her cross or hide it beneath a company cravat by a duty manager at Heathrow's Terminal 4 last month.
She then sought permission from management to wear the chain - but was turned down.
When Miss Eweida, who is unmarried, refused to remove the necklace she was offered the choice of suspension with pay or unpaid leave, pending a disciplinary hearing.
Following a meeting with her managers on 22 September 2006, Customer Service Manager Caroline Girling told Miss Eweida in a letter: "You have been sent home because you have failed to comply with a reasonable request.
"You were asked to cover up or remove your cross and chain which you refused to do.
"British Airways uniform standards stipulate that adornments of any kind are not to be worn with the uniform."
In a letter to Miss Eweida's MP, Vince Cable, last week, BA chief executive Willie Walsh insisted his employee had not yet been disciplined but said she was off work for failing to comply with "uniform regulations".
He added: "We have previously made changes to our uniform policy to accommodate requests, after a detailed evaluation process including Health and Safety assessment to incorporate the wearing of Sikh bangles."
But Miss Eweida said: "BA refuses to recognise the wearing of a cross as a manifestation of the Christian faith, but rather defines it as a piece of decorative jewellery.
"I would like to say how disappointed I am in this decision and the lack of respect shown by BA towards the Christian faith.
"I have been badly treated.?I am a loyal and hardworking employee and for seeking similar rights to other employees, I have been treated harshly by British Airways management.
"British Airway can be great again, but it needs to treat Chrstians fairly. I am not ashamed of my faith."
Miss Eweida is suing BA under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003.
Her case is being supported by her union, the TGWU, and she has hired Paul Diamond, a barrister specialising in religious affairs and an adviser for the Keep Sunday Special campaign, to represent her at her employment tribunal.
And a petition of support has been signed by more than 200 fellow workers.
BA is already at the centre of a criminal investigation into alleged price-fixing - which has led to the resignations of two executives.
The airline has come under fire in the past for its adherence to political correctness.
A decade ago it attempted to ditch its traditional Union Flag tailfin in favour of an ethnic design - which provoked the anger of Baroness Thatcher.
Mr Cable, MP for Twickenham and Liberal Democrat deputy leader said: "It is absolutely mind boggling that Britain's flag-carrying airline could treat its employees in such a disgraceful and petty manner.
"Nadia is a devout Christian who was displaying her faith, but in a modest and totally unprovocative manner.
"It is absolutely right that other religious minorities be allowed exemption from the dress code, but why can't a Christian be treated in the same way?"
Dr Patrick Sookhdeo, international director of the Christian charity the Barnabas Fund, said: "Discrimination against Christians is commonplace in Muslim-majority contexts, such as Egypt where Nadia's family roots are. ? "Now we see the same thing increasingly happening within the UK.
"Her Sikh and Muslim colleagues at BA can show their faith publicly in what they wear, but Nadia and other Christians cannot. All we are asking for is a level playing field for all faiths."
Andrea Williams of the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship said: "The forces of political correctness are such that an individual?needs to?be very determined to protect their rights."
The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files.

The West at the beginning of the 21st century suffers from a lack of cultural confidence, and is in some ways engaged in an internal struggle over the very meaning of Western civilization. This ideological “war within the West” has helped paved the way for the physical “war against the West” that is waged by Muslim Jihadists, who quite correctly view our creed of Multiculturalism and our acceptance of Muslim immigration as signs of weakness and that the West has lost contact with its civilizational roots.Perhaps we will need to resolve the war within the West before we can win the war against the West. When Westerners such as Polish king Jan III Sobieski led their troops to victory over the Turks in the 1683 Battle of Vienna, they fought for a number of reasons: Their country, their culture and their religion, among other things. People don’t just need to live, they need something to live for, and fight for. We are against Islam. What are we for?
Read it all