‘Islamic elements must be accepted’
Europe must learn to accept an Islamic element to governments in North Africa, according to Foreign Affairs Minister Tonio Borg.
He argued that what mattered most was not the religious underpinnings of a government but rather its respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
Dr Borg was speaking to a gathering of diplomats and students at a Euromed conference organised by the Mediterranean Academy of Diplomatic Studies in which he gave an overview of Malta’s relations with its Arab neighbours.
Malta’s involvement in Libya was underscored by the 2,400 visas Malta had issued to Libyan nationals in January and February of this year, while 320 Maltese businesses had expressed interest in joining a trade delegation to Libya.
The Arab Spring had further convinced Malta that its vocation as an interlocutor between Europe and the Arab world needed to be pursued with greater insistence, Dr Borg said.
He said the EU had to be willing to increase financial assistance to Arab Spring countries, as unemployment and tourism revenue there plummeted.
While expressing the hope that Egypt – “North Africa’s largest democracy” – would make good on its promise to extend civil rights and liberties, the Foreign Minister noted that Syria remained a matter of concern.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Marsa murder - Police looking...
Update 2: Three arrests after flamingo...
Former Judge Ray Pace found dead
Where’s Everybody staff is given notice
Revealed...the face of a Maltese woman...
Update 4 - Eddie Fenech Adami stable...
Update 3 - Woman trapped as car crashes...
Updated - Two bodies, capsized boat,...
Franco Mercieca doing routine eye ops at...
In Discussion
Update 2: Three arrests after flamingo...
Enemalta seeking minimum five year gas...
Mario de Marco, Zammit Dimech concede,...
Chinese company to study Malta-Gozo...
Updated - PM reacts to Labour anger on...
Franco Mercieca doing routine eye ops at...
No appeals board for first part of power...
Updated - PM comments as Franco Mercieca...
BBC site highlights illegal hunting in Malta
61 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Martin Cassar
May 15th 2012, 16:18
As far as theft, rapist, usury, murdering are concerned I, and without reservation would very much welcome importing few element from Sharia laws. I am not a rapist or a thief, why should I worry???
What about chopping a thief-hand? Yes it s ugly, cruel, and harsh. However, we don’t have to look at theft while setting behind a computer screen, sipping a hot coffee and passing a comment. We must look in-depth at the cataclysmic sequences of thefts. Theft could drive companies out of business; families and kids could suffer and get destitute and dispossessed. To condense, theft could also bankrupt the society at large; create insecurity, in cohesion and social chaos. If this Sharia laws are applicable on everyone, then, why worry? Personally, I don’t mind living under such laws. I fee safe, why should I steal after all? Don’t you like to live in a safe place? Sounds dandy for me indeed. Before some one suggest I go and live in Iran….I would rather import few elements of Sharia laws that would help my Europe to get rid of thieves, drugs , alcohol , usury and all those types of social disease all European governments are fighting today and Billions of tax payers money are spent in trying to find a fix! Aren’t we today fighting what Iran has been fighting for long?
We do use human rights as political tool against RICH AND RESOURCEFULL Muslim countries either to get some fuel or to immune the illegal Zionists occupation. This in my humble opinion uglier than any Sharia!
Why do we point fingers at Iran and jump upside down whenever an execution takes place and keep mum when the USA or Japan execute????
Why worry about few limbs of culprits? In our ‘modern’ days how many millions fellow humans are painfully and cruelly mutilated by land-mines that were planted by fellow Christians?
Graham Holme
May 15th 2012, 17:12
Martin Cassar
Are you for real?
Do you know the full implications of sharia law?
Rape,,a woman raped under sharia,must produce 4 male witnesses to verify said rape,failure to do so, could result in the death of the victim,,so rapes go unreported
Will not post the video of the young Muslim boy,held down whilst a heavy truck runs over his arm,,his crime? stealing a loaf of bread.
And you welcome condone this?
Graham Holme
May 15th 2012, 18:20
Do your homework again
Where do you think the vast majority of heroin is produced?statistics state 90%of heroin flooding the world market is produced in???.Let me enlighten you,a Muslim country,,,AFGHANISTAN,,,
Graham Holme
May 15th 2012, 19:52
Last word on the subject Martin Cassar,,,Sharia law in all its glory ,,,,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uplwcikqwCU
Graham Holme
May 15th 2012, 19:59
Wafa Sultan,,escaped the horror of Sharia,,an ex Muslim lady,tells it how it is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSv_Jpj9RI4
Charles Grixti
May 15th 2012, 15:53
And what "islamic elements' are these that we are suppose to accept?
Would it be the second class status of women, gays and all non-Muslims? Or is it perhaps the killing of those that leave the Muslim faith or insult Mohammed? Then maybe it could be the stoning of adulterers and the cutting of hands of thieves in public? Then again it could be mutliple wives or the underage marriage of girls. Why the possibilties are endless, we have a virtual cornucopia of trangressions against human rights and dignity that fall under the category of "Islamic elements". Just goes to show the complete moral bankruptcy of most Western leaders.
p grima
May 15th 2012, 01:01
Christian elements are not accepted or tolerated in islamic countries.
p grima
May 15th 2012, 00:49
Mind you, Minister, that there is strictly no democracy whatsoever in sharia law.
Roger Tirazona
May 14th 2012, 22:10
If by Islamic elements you mean, the respect for people's freedom to worship then we are in agreement. If you mean that any religion, whether islamic or Christian, should have the special treatment to be allowed within public policy... we are in a severe divergence.
Colin Stanley
May 14th 2012, 19:12
Well before we joined the EU we were constantly told that Europe had Christain values, after we joined , Christain values TA, TA.
Christian Sciberras
May 14th 2012, 23:03
What the heck are you talking about?
Whoever told you that pulled a fast one over you...
Lino Maniscalco
May 14th 2012, 19:00
The European governments first must learn how to protect our Christian cultures which we inherited from our ancestors before we start learning to accept Islamic elements and our cultures in our countries have to be protected by law.
Robert Callus
May 14th 2012, 15:58
Depends on what the "Islamic elements" are. On the same lines the Catholic church influences politics in Malta? Definitely not desirable but compared to a tyrannical regime like that of Mubarak or Gaddafi, it's definitely a million times better.
Or does it mean a strict form of Sharia law that imposes on people's freedoms and is intolerant towards religious minorities? If that's the case, NO we must not accept it at all and Malta and the EU need to use all diplomatic pressures to emphasize on human rights.
@Ms.D. Galea
Are you the same person who used to comment against introducing divorce? Now, you may argue that a strict form of Sharial law is much more serious, but the thinking behind it - imposing religion on those who don't want to - is exactly the same. (If you're not the same person, I apoligize)
P Sciberras
May 14th 2012, 15:47
I agree with Mr E Saliba comment especially his last part that the local people should decide democratically they elect. But if we watch what is going on, after the suppose the end of the Mubarak regime., Seems it is not the will of the Egyptian people whom to elect,but the will of the USA and Israel.The Mubarack regime is still 100% in control. For the west there still space for a good and a bad regime.
Emma Xerri
May 14th 2012, 14:47
Then so much for all the phoney talk about Human Rights and Democracy made by the EU and the US.
Evarist Saliba
May 14th 2012, 14:28
The phrase "Islamic elements to governments" is subject to various interpretations, and each critic will choose the one which suits best his/her argument. The same could also be said to "human rights, democracy, and the rule of law".
Having said that, "Islamic elements" can never be taken to mean "everything that extreme Islamism stands for".
In any case, it is for the people of North Africa, and not for us, to decide (democratically, one hopes) what sort of government they are to have. The same applies to what sort of government we choose to elect.
Emma Xerri
May 14th 2012, 14:49
At the very least, Islamic elements means Sharia compliance. Sharia law discriminates againts non-Muslims, women and minorities and does not separate religion from the State. The religious laws become the laws of the country. Where do you see democracy and human rights in this?
Graham Holme
May 14th 2012, 18:02
With over 100 sharia courts now in full flow the UK,,where will it all end?
Muslims allowed to settle domestic,financial disputes in above
Example,,Documentary on TV one such court,,Muslim male seeking a divorce,,says I divorce you three times to his wife,,job done
Muslim woman seeking a divorce,claiming her husband beat her,,lifting up her face veil,,the bruises,marks were evident,,the Imam presiding told her she probably deserved the beatings,,to go away,stop wasting his time.
Evarist Saliba
May 15th 2012, 09:43
@ Emma Xerri
You jump to conclusions and put your words in my mouth. I never claimed that Sharia law is democratic or that it is based on human rights.
What I claim is that Islamic elements do not necessarily mean the imposition of "extreme Islamism". The proof of the pudding will be in the eating.
@ Graham Holme
As far as I am aware there are no Islamic elements imposing themselves in the House of Commons, and yet, as you say, Sharia courts are operating in the UK. The same applies to courts among Jewish communities. But may I ask what this has to do with Islamic elements in Arab countries?
The tendency for person to go off the subject is rather common.
Graham Holme
May 15th 2012, 10:15
Evarist Saliba
As far as you are aware there are no Islamic elements imposing themselves in the house of commons?
Suggest you also do your homework....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQZKCH2hwa0
Graham Holme
May 15th 2012, 10:21
The difference being,,courts belonging to Jewish communities do not advocate,amputation for theft,stoning to death for adultery,death for apostates unlike sharia law ,,,,
Graham Holme
May 15th 2012, 11:02
Evarist Saliba
In answer to your question,Islamic elements in Arab countries
All well and good,keep the Islamic elements in Arab countries
But these"Islamic elements"flee to the Western world,claim asylum,state persecution in the Arab country they have fled from
Then try to inflict their Islamic element onto the country that has taken them in,,try to change the host nation,into the hell hole they have fled from
Emma Xerri
May 15th 2012, 15:16
@Evarist Saliba
Sorry sir, but I did not put any words into your mouth. If you knew anything about Islam you would have know that there is only one version of Islam and not two, a mild and a fundamentalist one - see what Turkey PM Edrogan has to say about this. And also you should know that 'Islamic elements' is Western code speech for Sharia (which you agree is not democratic).
So in a nutshell the West supported the Muslim Brotherhood and the Arab Spring in North Africa knowing full well what the implications would mean in terms of human rights and democracy (from the frying pan into the fire) – which begs the question, what is in it for the West or more precisely, for Western corporate elites and their oil rich Muslim partners in the Middle East?
Evarist Saliba
May 16th 2012, 12:41
@Emma Xerri
I have lived in Arab Muslim countries. I have mingled with Muslims and discussed with them what Islam is all about. I have read the Koran thanks to a donation from the Libyan government.
And I know that loose labels like "Islamism" extreme or not, lead to loose conclusions.
Having had all that experience, I disagree with interpretations that put women on an inferior level than men, punishments that are cruel and inhuman, or attitudes towards "unbelievers" which show, or bodrer on, hatered.
But all this has nothing to do with people in Arab countries deciding to have elements of Islamism in their governments, or whether other governments should accept or not such a decision.
@ Graham Holme
You wrtite a lot and yet you do not address yourself to the statement by the Maltese Foreign Minister and my comment on what he said.
The minister spoke of elected Islamic elements in Arab countries and therefore your comment about what is happening in the UK is totally irrelevant because it is NOT happening in an Arab country, and, in any case, unless it is specifically outlawed it follows that it is accepted. I had to refer to the situation in the UK because you decided to introduce it.
Your attitude of not having Islamism, extreme or not, becoming part of the government that represents you is entirely valid, but the Maltese minister never said or implied otherwise, unless you live in and have the right to vote in an African Arab country.
Charles Grixti
May 16th 2012, 22:37
@Evarist Saliba
I too have read the Koran and not the sanitized version either. All the things that people fear about Islam and its Sharia are there in the Koran and since it is the word of God, it can never be changed or amended.
I do not know what conclusion you came to during your sojourn in Muslim countries or what your conversations with Muslims amounted to but one has to be very careful since when discussing their religion with non-Muslims, Muslims are permitted to lie. There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam - in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.
Martin Cassar
May 14th 2012, 13:49
But should we first re-define our understanding and definition of human rights and democracy and equally stop using those values as political tools mainly to back and immune the Bible-Based illegal Zionist occupation?
What I mean is this, not long ago the Swiss people have set a dangerous precedent by putting HUMAN RIGHTS’ related matters into referendum when they voted to ban mosques minarets. Can we just envisage what would have been the ‘democratic Christian’ west reaction if for example Iran or Egypt banned some churches to have steeples?
Would we still be approving the Egyptian or the Iranian right of democracy? Would we still be siding with either the Iranian or the Egyptian? Would the EU keep mum; would EU Human Rights apologists keep quite? I very much doubt!
Any way what the Swiss did was a product of democracy, I would say no thanks, I don’t want this democracy as I equally disapprove a secular culture that produced Hitler or that terrorist of Oslo!
Graham Holme
May 14th 2012, 16:18
Can we just envisage what would have been the ‘democratic Christian’ west reaction if for example Iran or Egypt banned some churches to have steeples?
Suggest you do your homework my friend..The Muslims in Egypt are taking it one step further,,re banning church steeples,,they are blowing them up,,along with the people inside the church
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79oX0QX2qTU
Emma Xerri
May 15th 2012, 05:45
Iran bans not only steeples, but people for being Christian.
A Christian pastor has been condemned to death and his execution is imminent.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/345228/berlin-fears-imminent-execution-of-iranian-pastor/
Another one is beaten in prison.
http://www.bosnewslife.com/21662-news-alert-iran-house-church-pastor-still-beaten-in-prison
Franco Farrugia
May 14th 2012, 13:46
Here s quoting an English-language local newspaper, an interview with the new US Ambassador to Malta:
´She(the Ambassador) returned to the Middle East in 2002 as the first female Consul General in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where, she says, she was given the status of “honorary male” because she was a foreign diplomat.
And that, is that.
Jessica Smith
May 14th 2012, 13:45
Dr Borg, you are disgraceful in trying to make the people submit to the use of the Burka as was stated in Kullhadd yesterday. We must not accept this. As long as they are in Malta they MUST accept our customs and not force us to accept their dark ages customs. We shall not bend down to them and their demands like you and your government are doing. How long is it going to be for someone to pull off the Burka off someone who is seen wearing one?
Anthony Scicluna
May 14th 2012, 14:41
First and foremost Jessica, it is the husbands and fathers of Muslim women who enforce wearing the Burka! it is not Dr Borg or the Nationalists or the Malta Labour Party. Second, who is forcing you to wear the Burka? Dr Borg is of the opinion that what matters is democracy and equality. I find the Burka and equality a contradiction in terms because they mean different things (see my first comment). BUT it has nothing to do with the government or the opposition or people who spew prejudiced and racist comments such as " we will not bend over" to "their demands". Also, do not suppose that JM will easily dismiss the wearing of the Burka. He may make it a policy but no Muslim will dare to break the law as laid down in the Kuran. That is, they will keep wearing it.
Jessica Smith
May 14th 2012, 15:57
Anthony Scicluna I do not care who orders them to wear the Burka or not. It must not be allowed in Malta. Those who go to Islamic countries have to abide by their standards so if they come here they must abide by OUR standards as long as they remain here. Regarding Dr Borg, it is he and his pals who would allow it because they have the power to prohibit it. So yes, it is Dr Borg who must not bend to the imposition. As for spewing prejudiced and racist comments, your stance says it all. You unlike me and others are ready to submit to anything foreigners say because otherwise you are afraid that you will be called racist. Now I don't care what you or others call me but NO, wearing the Burka in Malta is NOT acceptable and we shall not bend down to their demands. If they don't like it then they have to stay away. As for Muslim law, it shows how you know absolutely nothing because they are NOT required to wear it. In fact it is only a tiny minority that do so. If you read the international media you would know that even Imams have come against it.
Graham Holme
May 14th 2012, 20:07
Racist comments?
Islam is a religion is it not?
Pray tell how one can be classed as racist,to oppose a religion?
Criticise the Catholic religion,Christian,Hindu,Sikh etc,no problem,,all well and good
Derogatory remarks re Islam,,the so called"Religion of peace"taboo,Racist,Islamaphobic fills the air
martin chetcuti
May 14th 2012, 13:17
''He argued that what mattered most was not the religious underpinnings of a government but rather its respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law.''
Dear Minister Borg wake up..
True but unfortunately those are FAR fetched principles in a Muslim country ......
Jesmond Micallef
May 14th 2012, 15:42
Mr. Martin Chetcuti,
Christian countries such as Northern Ireland is famous for bloodshed between the Roman Catholics and the Protestants over a much prolonged period of time....!
Religious fundamentalism is outright dangerous. History has proven this all too often.
Pippo De Marco
May 14th 2012, 12:50
Personally, I don't have a problem accepting Islamic elements in North African governments, but I do object when Islamic immigrants start calling for Islamic elements, such as Sharia law, in Europe.
If moderate Islamics and clerics did more to address the extremist elements of Islam, then the world would be a more tolerant and peaceful place.
Ms.D. Galea
May 14th 2012, 12:41
Dear Dr Borg, I
"Islamic" elements include treating women and non-muslims as official third-class citizens in society and in the courts of justice, divorcing one's wife without having to give a reason ad by smssing her his decision three times , considering children in a marriage as exclusive property of the father ,and condoning capital punishment , flogging or mutilation for those accused of adultery, theft, atheism.....or of being gay !
Is this what we in Malta. are being asked to accept from the neighbouring countries we assisted in the Arab Spring of last year?!
Ms.D. Galea
May 14th 2012, 12:31
"He argued that what mattered most was not the religious underpinnings of a government but rather its respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law."
Does Dr Borg know that human rights , democracy, marriage , women's rights , children's rights , and "the rule of law" as we know them, have a totally different meaning when seen from the Islamic point of view?
As far as an Islamic state is concerned, there is no concept of giving to Caeser what is Caeser's and giving to God what is God's.
It is all God's!
Victor Laiviera
May 14th 2012, 14:00
The differences you underline are not between Christian and Muslim, but between religious and secular. For example, both Islam and Christianity treat women as inferior to men.
We should not accept anything less than total separation between church and state - whatever the religion.
Joe Scerri
May 14th 2012, 12:07
Will they treat their women as equals and not as chattel?
Will they accept other religions including the minority variations of their own?
Will they have a sense of humour and accept jokes about their religion without asking for someones head?
I have as yet to see a government that is religious based and is at par with Western ones. Religion and state do not mix,period.
J Cassar
May 14th 2012, 12:01
Like they accept ours??
Patrick Zammit
May 14th 2012, 12:00
"Civil rights and liberties" today, are respected under Islam just as much as "civil rights and liberties" were respected during the Dark Ages under Catholic Europe.
John Neville Ebejer
May 14th 2012, 11:53
By how things stand Europe has a problem with accepting any form of religion elements in European Governments. The trend is that whatever is inspired by non religious entities is ok to be considered as rightful or respectful. Europe's accepted religion that is :whatever it is,is considered a value as long as not inspired by a religion.
Daniel Tanti
May 14th 2012, 11:47
‘Islamic elements must be accepted’, 'He argued that what mattered most was not the religious underpinnings of a government but rather its respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law.'
How can this be taken seriously, considering that the new Libyan government "will embrace" the Sharia law?
Mr ALBERT LEONE GANADO
May 14th 2012, 11:18
"Europe must learn to accept an Islamic element to governments in North Africa"
A very insightful observation by minister TB. Our style of Democracy is a new concept to a certain extent in most of the North African countries and the only values which bind their tribes and cities together is Islam especially in countries where the majority belong to the same denomination of Islam. The only leaders in these countries who have a direct link with the ordinary people are the Islamists and it is only they therefore who can bring deep rooted order, consensus and a semblance of a national government . We have to remember that the Islamic parties have been excluded from exercising official power in their countries for a long time and therefore it is natural that some of them are very conservative in their beliefs. As Turkey has shown the majority of Islamic leaders are not dogmatic and we should not be scared or denigrate Islamic concepts like adoption of Sharia Law or the apparent susidiary role of women. It is the liberal Western style of living which can at present disturb harmony by corrupting their young population which is culturally not prepared for new values which would upset the traditional order. What many of us hope for is a moderate type of islam which is tolerant and follows the Turkish model. Strangely because of our up to very recent very conservative religious ideas I find we can understand their traditional Islamic values better than most Europeans and we should exploit this to get our peoples closer.
Kathy Elliot
May 14th 2012, 11:03
I have not problem with religious governments - Maltese constitution is Christian - but as long as the all important human rights - especially freedom of speech - are respected.
Victor Laiviera
May 14th 2012, 12:03
That is a contradiction in terms. Religious government and respect for human rights are mutually exclusive.
Joseph Aquilina
May 14th 2012, 12:53
@Victor Laiviera
Don't make me laugh. The Roman Catholic Church has fought for human rights through out its history. However I guess you learn what human rights are from your beloved MLP back in the 80s ... when the socialist government used to send the police to fight with nationals supporters!! That is prime example of respecting human rights Victor Laiviere!!??
Ramon Casha
May 15th 2012, 06:11
@Joseph Aquilina: "The Roman Catholic Church has fought for human rights through out its history. "
Including those parts of its history when it was burning people alive? How about more recently when it is fighting tooth and nail to deny human rights to gay people? Or maybe trying to deny effective fertility treatment to couples who need medical assistance to have children?
Human rights have been achieved DESPITE the Roman Catholic Church, not because of it.
Ms Maria Vella
May 14th 2012, 10:37
It is a pity that Islamic governments do not respect Christian elements as much as Christian governments accept their elements.....
Ramon Casha
May 14th 2012, 10:28
Europe's governments must never be willing to compromise on human rights, whatever the excuse. Religious governments usually abuse human rights, and Islam's record in this regard is particularly worrying.
Victor Laiviera
May 14th 2012, 10:27
"He argued that what mattered most was not the religious underpinnings of a government but rather its respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law."
That is a contradiction in terms. No Government which is religion-based (any religion) can be democratic and respect human rights at the same time.
Mark Anthony Caruana
May 14th 2012, 09:46
I hope that Christian elements are also accepted by north African nations!
l vella
May 14th 2012, 12:31
there is a christian presence in all north African nations.
Franco Farrugia
May 14th 2012, 12:43
@ I Vella: There is also 'christian' bloodshed, along with 'christian presence', in these 'nations'.
Franco Farrugia
May 14th 2012, 09:31
I don't personally believe that it's a question of accepting or not, Islamic elements. The Western world has no say in the matter. 'We' just furnish them with the money and with diplomatic relations because it is expedient to do so but I repeat, we have no say in the matter.
However, to speak of 'Islamic elements' and things like 'respect for democracy', etc...., to me, is a contradiction. Islamic countries are not democratic countries; Islamic countries do not respect human rights; Islamic countries do not respect the rule of law. We have seen it, we have heard it, we have even witnessed it.
sharon camilleri
May 14th 2012, 10:39
exactly Franco.. totally agree with you
Jesmond Micallef
May 14th 2012, 12:40
What you say is interesting, Mr. Farrugia.
European Governments with European Christian elements liberated North African Moslem Libya recently ! Is this a time that "religious" elements within governments "liberate or help" oneanother ................... ??
Christian backed european industries did and still do supply the weapons and for what purpose ?
Faith is personal, private (....if not intimate) and should be freely sought but definitely never imposed in any manner, either upon a civilised collective or any individual.
Franco Farrugia
May 14th 2012, 13:50
@ Mr Micallef: I dont think you can call European Governments "Christian", anymore. They re just lay governments.
There should not be any religious elements within governments. Governments should respect all religions, all faiths, always mindful of the traditions of that particular country.
Similarly, I do not understand what you mean by "Christian backed european industries". Please explain and if possible, give examples.
Faith is not only personal. Faith is to be shared amongst those who are part of it. It is not just private. I agree that it should never be imposed on anyone and in any manner.
Colin Stanley
May 15th 2012, 14:46
What do you mean,We just furnish them with the money, to do what?
Drocan Lubstuit
May 14th 2012, 09:15
Dr Borg's speach as reported above is very much in contrary to what he used to say when he was still President of the MZPN, when he used to preach for the needs of the students in the 80's and their democratic right to learn whatever languages they liked whilst not being force-fed Arabic for 5 years in secondary school.
Is it OK now to accept an Islamic Element since the Arab world is becoming the Cash Cow for an immediate and global economic boost?
I am sure that next week Dr Borg will emphasise the importance of including springrolls and noodles in our cuisine, to ensure our acceptance of Chinese elements too!!
Please choose the reason of your report below: