Boris and the burka

I don't see why he needs to bite his tongue in this situation. He's known for making flippant comments, to treat this particular clothing option (which isn't required in Islam) with some special reverence would be pandering to the sort of backwards beliefs he's opposing in the first place.
 
So to sum up:

1: Boris writes a (surprisingly) balanced and informative article on why he opposes a ban on the Burka.
2: Left wing "alt news" sites repost bits of it out of context to make his comments look Islamophobia.
3: Real news sites pick up on the ****storm and report how he's under fire from rights groups (but not that he didn't actually do anything bad).
4: Theresa May condemns his comments (NB: not his actual comments, the altered out of context ones from the "alt news" articles).
5: The BBC (who impressively go out of their way to avoid taking a side) republish his actual article exonerating him.

So Boris looks like a **** in the eyes of people who get their news from Facebook and thought he was a **** anyway, but now May looks like a **** in the eyes of the people who matter to her/Boris and Boris looks like a victim. Well played Theresa, the burning skip fire of your premiership continues lol.
 
Dis86 said:
You're arguing that from the position that what he's said is wrong.
Many people have the conflicting opinion that it's entirely correct.
Click to expand...

That's an over simplification. There are people who agree what he's said and how he's said it. There are those who agree with the sentiment, but not the language used and those (very few I'd propose) who disagree with both.

The furore is about the language used and delivery and whether it's befitting of a high profile MP.

If he's right or not isn't important. That's a matter of opinion.
 
Afghanistan as it looked in the 60s/70s:

cbbic1o.jpg


Those people are muslims and didn't seem to feel the need to wear it back then. It is something that has been pushed onto them by Islamic fanatics thanks to the promotion and spreading of Salafi beliefs by Saudi Arabia.

This is a symbol of oppressive people who promote misogyny, homophobia, anti semitism:

6lYBPsa.jpg


Seemingly ridiculing it has caused screeches of "racism" and "Islamophobia"

This is a symbol of oppressive people who promote racism:

8SfigdZ.jpg


I suspect that no one would really care if a politician referred to the clothing choice there as perhaps dressing like "ghosts" or similar. I doubt we'd have cries of "Christianphobia" either...

It would be utterly ridiculous if we did. I'm not saying they're completely comparable, I'd say the KKK outfit is an order of magnitude worse as it is worn by people who actively oppress whereas the full veil/niqab is worn by people who are oppressed or who oppress others or perpetuate the oppression of others and some who simply have some rather warped beliefs about modesty (mostly as a result of continued oppression). Nonetheless both are symbols of oppression and in principle both are worthy of criticism and ridicule for that same reason.
 
ubersonic said:
So to sum up:

1: Boris writes a (surprisingly) balanced and informative article on why he opposes a ban on the Burka.
2: Left wing "alt news" sites repost bits of it out of context to make his comments look Islamophobia.
3: Real news sites pick up on the ****storm and report how he's under fire from rights groups (but not that he didn't actually do anything bad).
4: Theresa May condemns his comments (NB: not his actual comments, the altered out of context ones from the "alt news" articles).
5: The BBC (who impressively go out of their way to avoid taking a side) republish his actual article exonerating him.

So Boris looks like a **** in the eyes of people who get their news from Facebook and thought he was a **** anyway, but now May looks like a **** in the eyes of the people who matter to her/Boris and Boris looks like a victim. Well played Theresa, the burning skip fire of your premiership continues lol.
Click to expand...

Boris doesnt look like a victim. Looks like he is under serious pressure to apologise at the moment.
 
Hopefully he won't back down, we don't need more people contributing to the notion that this sort of thing needs some sacred cow status and can only be criticised using carefully chosen language so as not to "offend".
 
Amp34 said:
@Raggs I've seen them very occasionally, generally around Mayfair/Piccadilly, usually with designer bags - presumably wives and family members of Saudi royalty on a shopping trip!

Presumably there are some that actually live in the UK though.
Click to expand...

I’ve seen one or two along Whitechapel Road East London, at the market, near the station.
 
Should a woman have to wear a specific piece of clothing - ONLY if SHE wants to.

Banning a type of clothing is ridiculous. The rules compelling her to wear it against her will are what need to be addressed.

Telling a woman she can't wear something is as bad as telling her she must.

We need a secular state, secular education. Nothing will emancipate religiously oppressed woman more than growing up in a society where religion is never imposed, but a choice. Allowing faith schools to indoctrinate is a disaster. We need Muslim children to play with Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Atheist children. Children are not born with prejudice, they are taught it.
 
Loves Love Island said:
Hopefully he won't back down, we don't need more people contributing to the notion that this sort of thing needs some sacred cow status and can only be criticised using carefully chosen language so as not to "offend".
Click to expand...

Where did anyone say carefully?

Do you mean non-offensive?

Hopefully he will back down, we don't need more people contributing to the notion that this sort of thing should be criticised using offensive language.
 
Chris Wilson said:
She needs to be careful, one more trip to whoever the plastic surgeon is she uses could see her in need of some facial coverage. I suspect the surgeon wasn't French they're still considered the best. It looks more like the work of an alcoholic carpenter with the DT's. Silly old trout.
Click to expand...

Are you inciting for her endangerment? Tut tut. Saddest thing is you don't even realise how pathetic that comment is, she said something stupid, why add it to?
 
2018, can't make a joke without offending someone. What a pathetic country we have become, just more evidence that how soft skinned people have become.

All this time and effort wasted from the MSM and the political circles accusing each other being islamphobia or antisemitic, which in reality, if anyone is for the blame of rising tensions among communities, it's the BBC news and other MSM, maybe Apple, Google and Youtube should ban them from the network.

 
StriderX said:
Are you inciting for her endangerment? Tut tut. Saddest thing is you don't even realise how pathetic that comment is, she said something stupid, why add it to?
Click to expand...


I have to presume she chose and paid to have that done to herself, surprising as it may seem. Weston certainly did not. Dragging Weston into this is appallingly poor form, even for her.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom