When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
they look like letterboxes - yep
they look like bank robbers - yep
they look utterly ridiculous - yep
He could also have said they look like penguins.
All of that is fact so as far as i’m concerned there is nothing he has to apologise for. I’m just dissapointed he didn’t agree with Denmark’s stance on banning them in public.
It’s the normal typical left to react in such a way. It is neither islamaphobic or racist as it is not a requirement all muslim women wear it, only a small minority do based on stoneage views, and anyone of any colour can be muslim not to mention the fact islam is a religion and not a race
In view of the security issues the UK faces and westernised countries around the world anyone can hide behind a burka and it should be banned like Denmark and others have done. Aside from that there is the human rights argument for the women who are forced to wear them.
It’s time this issue was debated a lot more in the UK and Boris has lit a fuse that needed lighting.
They don't look like letterboxes in our town, where do you live?
Originally Posted by An0n0m0us
they look like bank robbers - yep
Er, no, they really don't.
Originally Posted by An0n0m0us
they look utterly ridiculous - yep
I think they look a bit daft, too, but then again, lots of people look daft, so where do you stop?
Originally Posted by An0n0m0us
He could also have said they look like penguins.
I can't ever say I've seen a Bhurka that is white at the front, and they don't waddle...........
Originally Posted by An0n0m0us
All of that is fact so as far as i’m concerned there is nothing he has to apologise for. I’m just dissapointed he didn’t agree with Denmark’s stance on banning them in public.
Let's ban anything that obscures your face in public! Hats, beards, sunglasses, long hair across your face!
I do agree that any institution that does not allow the face to be covered for security purposes (e.g. banks, airports etc) should not discriminate between motorcycle helmets and bhurka, for example.
Originally Posted by An0n0m0us
It’s the normal typical left to react in such a way. It is neither islamaphobic or racist as it is not a requirement all muslim women wear it, only a small minority do based on stoneage views, and anyone of any colour can be muslim not to mention the fact islam is a religion and not a race
No, it is not, and it is his opinion, which he is entitled to, but still ill advised to say.
Originally Posted by An0n0m0us
In view of the security issues the UK faces and westernised countries around the world anyone can hide behind a burka and it should be banned like Denmark and others have done. Aside from that there is the human rights argument for the women who are forced to wear them.
It’s time this issue was debated a lot more in the UK and Boris has lit a fuse that needed lighting.
The same applies to any covering,so in public I really don't see why they should be banned. Criminals rarely show their face, I don't see people screamnig for a ban on head coverings of all types in public?
they look like letterboxes - yep
they look like bank robbers - yep
they look utterly ridiculous - yep
He could also have said they look like penguins.
All of that is fact so as far as i’m concerned there is nothing he has to apologise for. I’m just dissapointed he didn’t agree with Denmark’s stance on banning them in public.
It’s the normal typical left to react in such a way. It is neither islamaphobic or racist as it is not a requirement all muslim women wear it, only a small minority do based on stoneage views, and anyone of any colour can be muslim not to mention the fact islam is a religion and not a race
In view of the security issues the UK faces and westernised countries around the world anyone can hide behind a burka and it should be banned like Denmark and others have done. Aside from that there is the human rights argument for the women who are forced to wear them.
It’s time this issue was debated a lot more in the UK and Boris has lit a fuse that needed lighting.
‘Lit a fuse’ LOL
To start with, Boris disagrees with you on the broader subject, he defends women’s right to wear what they like.It is however a classic piece of Boris ‘on manoeuvres’ again.
He’s throwing just enough red meat out there to keep himself ingratiated to the Tory members. As with everything that BJ does, this is about him and his political ambitions, and nothing else.
I don’t like Burkas or veils either, I don’t understand the rationale for them, but assuming it is the choice of the woman to wear it, then the government has absolutely no business in getting involved. I do accept that there are circumstances and situation in which cover your face should not be allowed.
I would love to see some stats on the actual number of women that cover their faces, I’m guessing it’s a very small percentage of Muslims.
Should we ban balaclavas? What about scarfs across your face in the winter? Or hooded tops? or Nuns Habbits?
I personally don't see the problem with Burka's et al. and if you ban one article of clothing because it covers your face, then you have to ban all forms of clothing that cover the face. The reality is, nobody would dream of banning scarves or wearing hoods, they just want to ban the Burka because its religious clothing that they don't like and that is anti-Islamic.
I fundamentally believe in the right to dress however you choose in public and to practice any religion you choose (or choose not) to follow. I am personally atheist, but that is my personal choice and I respect other peoples right to make up deities and worship them in a cult like manner as they see fit!
There are two other fundamental factors regarding wearing any clothing in public which obscures your identity, that is, you must reveal your identity to police when requested at any time and that owners of shops, shopping centers or other enclosed locations have the right to refuse entry on the basis of obscured identity for security reasons (although this has to be applied equally and not just to those in religious clothing).
The other issue of concern with religious clothing such as the burka is that it has to be the womans free choice to wear it and she is not being forced or unduly pressured to wear it by her husband, family or local community.
When in Rome comes to mind. We are not allowed to do things in other countries and get severely punished for it.
We are not in Rome, we're in the UK, and in the UK, Freedom and Tolerance are important rights that we highly value.
As to weather Boris should apologise, then absolutely! Whilst such 'jokes' may be marginally acceptable down the pub, as a serving member of parliament and public figure, he should be above making such personal insults to a minority group. We look to these people to set an example and that is not the sort of example someone in his position should be setting! Shame on him!
B******t I'm afraid your location says it all if I was going to a country where you are not allowed to drink I wouldn't drink. If I was going to a country that doesn't eat beef I wouldn't eat beef. As said before when in Rome do as the Romans do or accept the consequences.
B******t I'm afraid your location says it all if I was going to a country where you are not allowed to drink I wouldn't drink. If I was going to a country that doesn't eat beef I wouldn't eat beef. As said before when in Rome do as the Romans do or accept the consequences.
You are aware that your post makes absolutely no sense in the context of this thread aren't you?
B******t I'm afraid your location says it all if I was going to a country where you are not allowed to drink I wouldn't drink. If I was going to a country that doesn't eat beef I wouldn't eat beef. As said before when in Rome do as the Romans do or accept the consequences.
I absolutely agree by the principle that you abide by the rules of the country that you are in.
In the UK, the rules are that its completely acceptable to wear clothing that covers your face such as a Burka and its completely unacceptable to incite racial hatred of which Boris comments tread a very fine line.
I absolutely agree by the principle that you abide by the rules of the country that you are in.
In the UK, the rules are that its completely acceptable to wear clothing that covers your face such as a Burka and its completely unacceptable to incite racial hatred of which Boris comments tread a very fine line.
Acceptable until the natives/majority say hold on we've had enough of this time for a law change. It would possibly be different x amount of years ago when they were holiday makers or a minority but nowadays it is unacceptable you don't know who or what is looking at you.
Acceptable until the natives/majority say hold on we've had enough of this time for a law change. It would possibly be different x amount of years ago when they were holiday makers or a minority but nowadays it is unacceptable you don't know who or what is looking at you.
Acceptable until the law says so, I think you'll find. It is still a tiny minority of people who wear bhurkas. I can honestly say I see more Japanese tourists wearing face masks than I do people wearing bhurkas. As for people in motorcycle helmets........
Acceptable until the law says so, I think you'll find. It is still a tiny minority of people who wear bhurkas. I can honestly say I see more Japanese tourists wearing face masks than I do people wearing bhurkas. As for people in motorcycle helmets........
He may have a point (note, 'letterbox' not postbox):
Love how the press and Boris Bashers cherry pick just the juicy bits of his column and ignore the rest of it. Not that I bother to read the columns anyway as most are opinionated rubbish (take Katie Hopkins for instance).
I agree with Boris - In my view the Burkha is purely Subjugation of women by Strict Islamic Men.... therefore really has no place in our Western Society.
I agree with Boris - In my view the Burkha is purely Subjugation of women by Strict Islamic Men.... therefore really has no place in our Western Society.
Acceptable until the law says so, I think you'll find. It is still a tiny minority of people who wear bhurkas. I can honestly say I see more Japanese tourists wearing face masks than I do people wearing bhurkas. As for people in motorcycle helmets........
I beg to differ Sir this all depends on where you live I live somewhere where there are none at all and anyone you see wearing anything similar you get clear asap. I find it very intimidating going about my business and a crowd of people you don't know or can't see being in the vicinity.
I beg to differ Sir this all depends on where you live I live somewhere where there are none at all and anyone you see wearing anything similar you get clear asap. I find it very intimidating going about my business and a crowd of people you don't know or can't see being in the vicinity.
Location: The Cheshire end of the emasculated Cat & Fiddle
Posts: 9,465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 1509joe
I beg to differ Sir this all depends on where you live I live somewhere where there are none at all and anyone you see wearing anything similar you get clear asap. I find it very intimidating going about my business and a crowd of people you don't know or can't see being in the vicinity.
Really
It's a shame the kneejerkers in the press didn't read, or more accurately, report Boris' article fully. Whilst some of his language choices were undoubtedly questionable, the general tone of the piece was the complete opposite to how it's now being portrayed
It's a shame the kneejerkers in the press didn't read, or more accurately, report Boris' article fully. Whilst some of his language choices were undoubtedly questionable, the general tone of the piece was the complete opposite to how it's now being portrayed
^^^^^^^
Typical selective quoting. But whilst the "BurkaGate" issue is being debated, re-tweeted, mis-quoted and para prhrased, Labour continue to roll their eyes at the anti-Semitic issues they have going on within.
Probably is but at least you know what your dealing with when seen. Not pot luck like most places.
I think that is more a issue about austerity and cuts to policing, coupled with the fear-mongering of the British press, meaning that British people don't feel safe.
The question is, if you saw a bunch of people with motorcycle helmets or hoodies coming down the street, would you be equally intimidated as you are with women in Burkas?
I think that is more a issue about austerity and cuts to policing, coupled with the fear-mongering of the British press, meaning that British people don't feel safe.
The question is, if you saw a bunch of people with motorcycle helmets or hoodies coming down the street, would you be equally intimidated as you are with women in Burkas?
How do you know it is a woman in a Burkha? That is the underlying fear of those who oppose the wearing. However, it is not dictated in the Koran that it should be worn at all.
How do you know it is a woman in a Burkha? That is the underlying fear of those who oppose the wearing. However, it is not dictated in the Koran that it should be worn at all.
I think that is more a issue about austerity and cuts to policing, coupled with the fear-mongering of the British press, meaning that British people don't feel safe.
The question is, if you saw a bunch of people with motorcycle helmets or hoodies coming down the street, would you be equally intimidated as you are with women in Burkas?
How do you know it is a woman in a Burkha? That is the underlying fear of those who oppose the wearing. However, it is not dictated in the Koran that it should be worn at all.
How do you know it is a woman in a Burkha? That is the underlying fear of those who oppose the wearing. However, it is not dictated in the Koran that it should be worn at all.
Don't you think we'd all be better off focusing on real issues rather than imagined ones?
80% of human communication is non verbal. We pick up clues from another person from their clothes, demeanour, hair style, facial expressions etc. A burka does away with any of this. It dehumanises the person.
In every culture on Earth, except extreme Islam, there is no daily garb worn by a single gender as daily dress. It is associated with extreme religious belief. Extreme religious belief in any form is historically dangerous.
Numerous acts of Islamic terrorism have been perpetrated by men and women wearing burkahs and nicabs...terrorists have also evaded capture by wearing this type of dress.
To many, seeing a woman in a burkah and nicab is threatening, intimidating, and simply put, 'odd'. It is not normal on any society other than small pockets of hard line Islam.
There is an unholy alliance and 3rd wave feminism. One facet of this is, is claiming that the wearing of Burkah is a woman's choice, yet at the same stroke, women are being denied jobs based upon their beauty or judgments made about their clothes if they are considered immodest...F1 grid girls for example, which have been banned, in addition to adverts on the Tube that have been banned because they show 'unattainable standards of beauty'...
In certain sections of Catholicism, the priests wear silk gowns and hoods which entirely cover the face and body...This clothing can be seen during ceremonies in Spain and Italy etc...These religious clothes are also worn by hard line christians, the Ku Klux Klan.
The KKK are a religiously based hate group, whose inspiration was/is the bible. There are many parallels between the Burkah and the KKK robes...The KKK have committed horrible acts of racial terrorism (albeit in an era before nail bombs, suicide vests etc), although they did not blow up hospitals, infant schools and so on...
Islam has been forced into Western Culture, and is continuing at an alarming rate.
No one would ever have imagined a few years ago, that the new millennium would be dominated with never ending, on going conversations about medieval ideologies and practices such as butchering genitals, honour killing, religious murders and terrorism...We even have blasphemy laws..blasphemy was something that ceased to a 'thing' hundreds of years ago in our country, but now people are being imprisoned for something someone doesn't like about an invisible sky wizard...
Capitulation to Islam enables the terror, remember that the next time there is a pointless vigil, dead children at a pop concert or when you see concrete blocks around your town...
This is what we have imported and allowed and it will never stop.
Acceptable until the law says so, I think you'll find. It is still a tiny minority of people who wear bhurkas. I can honestly say I see more Japanese tourists wearing face masks than I do people wearing bhurkas. As for people in motorcycle helmets........
This is the perfect stupid, fallacious remark that makes a false dichotomy that is either spoken from ignorance or used as a straw man...It is rather like the 'body count' arguments which are absolutely meaningless and intellectually dishonest...ie: more children die from falling over than die from a suicide bombers...more people die on the roads than die from terrorism...
if you cannot understand why these remarks are pointless, false, meaningless and dishonest..if you cannot deconstruct these remarks, then you are cretin.
The Japanese tourist comment takes absolutely nothing else into account other than a garment..It doesn't take into account religious belief, culture, murder, gender, sexism...nothing..It is utterly facile....
It is rather like saying, 'people who drink water are evil...Hitler drank water'...
This type of moronic stupidity is an enormous part of the problem.
08 August 2018, 09:04 AM
Boris remarks about burkas
