Boris Johnson slammed over Islamophobic comments

[Bluespunk]

2 minutes ago, Opl said:

Bigoted and derogatory language choices are not “making fun”...

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

Bigoted and derogatory language choices are not “making fun”...

Especially when used for political ends.

[wildewillie89]

It is an odd one. Thai Prime Minister comments on women who wear 'skimpy dress' and TV has a meltdown over how ridiculous the comments were due to freedom of dress. UK politician comments on Islamic dress and TV members do complete back flips. How much irrational fear do people actually live in? If you are living an 'us vs them' BS mentality, then the 'them' are certainly a few sets up. Move on, it has absolutely no impact on your lives unless you let yourself fall victim to fear mongering campaigns based on absolutely nothing. 

Edited August 9, 2018 by wildewillie89

[owl sees all]

38 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Is Dagenham in the U.K.?

Very droll Grouse.

 

Dagenham is in the UK at the moment but is watching the Cornwall independence saga with some interest. The locals are in favour of joining a new country; The United Counties of England. After, of course, giving Scotland their long deserved freedom.

Edited August 9, 2018 by owl sees all

[billmichael]

Well, THEY DO LOOK LIKE LETTER BOXES.  The slit looks like the opening where one drops mail.  There is nothing 'phobic about calling it like it is.  Of course all of London has now gone caliphate with its new Moslem mayor..

[owl sees all]

12 minutes ago, sammieuk1 said:

Near the isle of dogs?

Not so close to the Isle of dogs bro'. It's at the junction of East London and Essex.

[sammieuk1]

8 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Not so close to the Isle of dogs bro'. It's at the junction of East London and Essex.

Ok Barking?

[owl sees all]

4 minutes ago, sammieuk1 said:

Ok Barking?

Yes Barking, the town with all the glorious history but next to Dagenham, the home of alternative culture, comedy and art.

Edited August 9, 2018 by owl sees all
Edit

[sammieuk1]

2 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Yes Barking, the town with all the glorious history but next to Dagenham, the home of alternative culture, comedy and art.

May the force Ford be with you?

[owl sees all]

9 minutes ago, sammieuk1 said:

May the force Ford be with you?

You obviously know the area bro'. You must miss It as much as I do?!

Edited August 9, 2018 by owl sees all
Edit

[DILLIGAD]

I was going to post a letter of complaint about this whole affair but upon posting it, the letterbox screamed at me so I didn't bother.

Sorry, couldn’t resist!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[7by7]

12 hours ago, notmyself said:

12 hours ago, 7by7 said:

So you believe that the UK government should dictate what people can and cannot wear?

 

Because that seems to be what you are saying!

 

We already do.

 Ok, I will grant you that there are some rules about what one can and cannot wear in public; for example it is illegal for someone, male or female, to walk around in public with their genitalia exposed, except on a nudist beach or similar.

 

[blazes]

3 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 Ok, I will grant you that there are some rules about what one can and cannot wear in public; for example it is illegal for someone, male or female, to walk around in public with their genitalia exposed, except on a nudist beach or similar.

 

 

Or impersonating a police officer.  IPO...

[7by7]

10 hours ago, Grouse said:

13 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

So you're saying because some countries have repressive laws which severely restrict individual freedoms, such what can and cannot be worn in public, that we should do the same?

Yes. If people will not respect OUR customs, they are being discourteous. It's not a style choice it's a statement. I don't wish to know what hocus pocus you believe in. Smile, say good morning and on your way.

 So you would ban all religious clothing worn in public?

 

Including that in the pictures I posted earlier from orthodox Jews and Christians?

 

The skull caps of less orthodox Jews?

 

The crucifixes of Catholics? This is a Protestant country after all, it's not that long historically since we burned Catholics at the stake! It is still compulsory for the monarch and any children in line to the throne to be Church of England.

 

What about the turbans of Sikhs, the dreadlocks of Rastafarians? (Dreads on a white man look ridiculous, and are usually worn for fashion not religious reasons, but I'm not going to try and ban white men from wearing dreads!)

 

Etc., etc.?

 

You must answer yes to all the above; you must want the wearing of all religious clothing and symbols in public banned.

 

To say otherwise brands you a hypocrite.

 

BTW, what about football shirts and other clothing showing the wearers sporting allegiance? I don't wish to know what hocus pocus you believe in team you support!

 

 

[7by7]

10 hours ago, Grouse said:

What's wrong with the "Christian" dress example? I don't get the point....

 Don't get the point, or wont get the point?

 

I suspect the latter.

 

 However, as is obvious from the captions, they are saying that the one on the left, covered virtually from the neck down to the ground is the proper way for a Christian woman to dress, whereas the one on the right wearing shorts and a skimpy top is not the way Christian woman should dress.

 

Not that I agree with them.

[duanebigsby]

On 8/8/2018 at 7:46 AM, cornishcarlos said:

The PC brigade, aka politicians, will give up our culture and heritage for fear of offending those not wishing to assimilate to their chosen country of residence....

It's embarrassing...!!

I don't understand how allowing others to practice their religion is in any way giving up your culture or heritage. It's like accepting gay marriage somehow undermines the family.

[7by7]

On ‎8‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 3:28 AM, phantomfiddler said:

Boris is correct, face veils should be illegal in public, simple as that !

From the above and other posts it is obvious that certain posters have not read the article; not even read the headline!

 

Boris is not arguing for a burka ban.

 

On the contrary, his article is arguing against such a ban.

 

Denmark has got it wrong. Yes, the burka is oppressive and ridiculous – but that's still no reason to ban it

 

But that doesn't excuse the language he used.

 

He is a highly intelligent man. I can only surmise he used such language to get the more right wing of the Tory party on his side ready for a post Brexit leadership bid.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 9, 2018 by 7by7

[Grouse]

30 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 So you would ban all religious clothing worn in public?

 

Including that in the pictures I posted earlier from orthodox Jews and Christians?

 

The skull caps of less orthodox Jews?

 

The crucifixes of Catholics? This is a Protestant country after all, it's not that long historically since we burned Catholics at the stake! It is still compulsory for the monarch and any children in line to the throne to be Church of England.

 

What about the turbans of Sikhs, the dreadlocks of Rastafarians? (Dreads on a white man look ridiculous, and are usually worn for fashion not religious reasons, but I'm not going to try and ban white men from wearing dreads!)

 

Etc., etc.?

 

You must answer yes to all the above; you must want the wearing of all religious clothing and symbols in public banned.

 

To say otherwise brands you a hypocrite.

 

BTW, what about football shirts and other clothing showing the wearers sporting allegiance? I don't wish to know what hocus pocus you believe in team you support!

 

 

Don't be silly

 

Nobody minds a small crucifix or even a turban. What ever turns you on. But wearing a huge black bag with s slot is beyond the pale. It is insulting and impolite. It makes the world an uglier place. If you want to ear a burka inside your synagogue or wherever you gather, up to you. I don't wish to see it. I am no hypocrite; I am a bigot.

[Grouse]

31 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 Don't get the point, or wont get the point?

 

I suspect the latter.

 

 However, as is obvious from the captions, they are saying that the one on the left, covered virtually from the neck down to the ground is the proper way for a Christian woman to dress, whereas the one on the right wearing shorts and a skimpy top is not the way Christian woman should dress.

 

Not that I agree with them.

I think people should dress courteously at all times. I abhor the way people dress to fly these days. I was in court suing someone today so I wore a dark suit and black oxfords. I dress smart casual when flying. I expect others to do the same. I don't mind people showing a small sign of which club they are a member of.  But I draw the line at people dressing like winged bats out of hell. It was terrible to see burkas sported in such beautiful places as Tivoli. 

 

I dislike loutish attitudes almost as much as I dislike have religious preferences thrust in my face.

 

Just behave.

[DILLIGAD]

I’d guess all these people against the Burkha wouldn’t have a problem with them if they visited a Muslim country but why change a Christian country?

We have evolved over centuries so why regress back 500 years (for example). The recent poll in UK is suggesting 93% are agreeing with what Boris said (IN FULL).

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[duanebigsby]

On 8/8/2018 at 12:41 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

Why? Burkas etc are not Islamic.

So many people getting hung up on semantics.

The burkas is indeed cultural. But  is only worn by Islamic women with extremely few exceptions.

I believe that this justifies  both the terms "bigotry" and "Islamophobic." 

 

Racism and bigotry have been conflated so much that racism is becoming common usage for hatred of a religion. For all those nitpicking that posters weren't using the term in terms of the dictionary definition.

[duanebigsby]

On 8/8/2018 at 12:57 PM, JAG said:

I'll second that. Several years ago I secured a cheap flight UK - Kuwait - BKK on Kuwait Airways. I am a Catholic, and always carry a set of Rosary Beads in a small leather pouch in my pocket. Going through security whilst transmitting through Kuwait before boarding the flight to BKK they were confiscated. I was told that they were not allowed in Kuwait. I protested but to no avail. 

30 minutes later, at the boarding gate, I was asked to identify myself to the boarding staff. A chap in a suit and headscarf looked long and hard at my passport, gave me a filthy look, hissed something in Arabic (I don't think it was have a good flight) and handed the Rosary back to me. 

 

 

 

 

Strange that the Catholic Travel Guide webpage lists both Bible and rosary beads as part of what to pack.

[Opl]

47 minutes ago, DILLIGAD said:

I’d guess all these people against the Burkha wouldn’t have a problem with them if they visited a Muslim country but why change a Christian country?
We have evolved over centuries so why regress back 500 years (for example). The recent poll in UK is suggesting 93% are agreeing with what Boris said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is commonly said that opposing burqa  is being "Islamophobic", the objective is, of course, that any justified condemnation of institutional Wahhabism is quickly perceived and narrated as targeting Muslims in general. 

There is no shame in condemning Islamist extremism and blocking it by all possible legal means in western societies. 

By banning burqa we are not afraid to say that Islam and Wahhabism are distinct , and that the latter threats the first for more than two centuries.

Edited August 9, 2018 by Opl

[JAG]

44 minutes ago, duanebigsby said:

Strange that the Catholic Travel Guide webpage lists both Bible and rosary beads as part of what to pack.

They may well do - I don't know, I have never felt the need to consult it. But then I don't suppose that the uniformed officials who confiscated my Rosary, (which was in a pouch remember, not being openly displayed) had either. As for the plain clothes official who so grudgingly returned it, maybe he had a clearer understanding of the rules, whatever they are. 

[cornishcarlos]

1 hour ago, duanebigsby said:

I don't understand how allowing others to practice their religion is in any way giving up your culture or heritage. It's like accepting gay marriage somehow undermines the family.

 

Let's see how we're all doing in 20 yrs time... My guess is, we'll all be practising Islam or dead ?

[notmyself]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

 Ok, I will grant you that there are some rules about what one can and cannot wear in public; for example it is illegal for someone, male or female, to walk around in public with their genitalia exposed, except on a nudist beach or similar.

 

 

Well thank you very much Sir.

 

Much of the same  'can - cannot' illogic is used by gun fetishists in the U.S. who consider the right to bear arms to be an absolute yet agree with not selling RPGs to anyone on the street.

 

Anyway... The burka and such is a symbol of oppression but it is also a tool of oppression and this utility aspect is the issue. If society self regulated it would not be an issue because nobody would be forced or coerced, but that is not the case is it.  Should we allow oppression so WE may be free?

 

 

 

[the guest]

Time to ban the veil all over Europe, has no place in western society !

[canuckamuck]

9 hours ago, DM07 said:

I, as a "left leaning liberal", absolutely do not defend burquas or whatever!

I, as an atheist, condemn every kind of religious BS!

 

Still curious, though, that the right never cares for equal rights or women's rights, in "their own" western societies, but are always fast with "fighting" for the rights of Muslim women!

I assume: as soon as these women are out of Muslim oppression, they will be told by western right wingers, never to even think about abortions, to stop dreaming about equal pay and to dress "decently" in order not to provoke rapes! 

Double standard much?!

 

Really, conservatives have no thoughts for women's rights and are always fighting for the rights of Muslim women? You live in a bubble of Marxist propaganda. There is in fact a wide spectrum of ideas and attitudes throughout the population, not just good vs evil as it appears to you, apparently.

[DM07]

6 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Really, conservatives have no thoughts for women's rights and are always fighting for the rights of Muslim women? You live in a bubble of Marxist propaganda. There is in fact a wide spectrum of ideas and attitudes throughout the population, not just good vs evil as it appears to you, apparently.

Nice try to twist my words!

Cheap...but nice!

 

[Kadilo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45130532

 

.....and now the internal investigation. 

All part of his master plan. 

Edited August 9, 2018 by Kadilo