[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
BADASSES

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts]
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 61223)
Message
File  []
close
_102880824_johnson_burqa_getty-2.jpg
612236122361223
>> No. 61223 Are Moaty
8th August 2018
Wednesday 8:23 pm
61223 spacer
>If you tell me that the burka is oppressive, then I am with you. If you say that it is weird and bullying to expect women to cover their faces, then I totally agree – and I would add that I can find no scriptural authority for the practice in the northern lights. I would go further and say that it is absolutely ridiculous that people should choose to go around looking like letter boxes; and I thoroughly dislike any attempt by any – invariably male – government to encourage such demonstrations of “modesty”, notably the extraordinary exhortations of President Ramzan Kadyrov of Chechnya, who has told the men of his country to splat their women with paintballs if they fail to cover their heads.

>If a constituent came to my MP’s surgery with her face obscured, I should feel fully entitled – like Jack Straw – to ask her to remove it so that I could talk to her properly. If a female student turned up at school or at a university lecture looking like a bank robber then ditto: those in authority should be allowed to converse openly with those that they are being asked to instruct. As for individual businesses or branches of government – they should of course be able to enforce a dress code that enables their employees to interact with customers; and that means human beings must be able to see each other’s faces and read their expressions. It’s how we work.

>All that seems to me to be sensible. But such restrictions are not quite the same as telling a free-born adult woman what she may or may not wear, in a public place, when she is simply minding her own business.

>I am against a total ban because it is inevitably construed – rightly or wrongly – as being intended to make some point about Shamanism. If you go for a total ban, you play into the hands of those who want to politicise and dramatise the so-called clash of civilisations; and you fan the flames of grievance. You risk turning people into martyrs, and you risk a general crackdown on any public symbols of religious affiliation, and you may simply make the problem worse. Like a parent confronted by a rebellious teenager determined to wear a spike through her tongue, or a bolt through her nose, you run the risk that by your heavy-handed attempt to ban what you see as a bizarre and unattractive adornment you simply stiffen resistance.

So what's bozza meant to be apologising for? Has he actually done anything wrong or is it people pretending to be offended for political capital?
69 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown. Expand all images.
>> No. 61294 Crabkiller
10th August 2018
Friday 10:15 pm
61294 spacer
>>61292
Worked for trump
>> No. 61295 Are Moaty
10th August 2018
Friday 11:05 pm
61295 spacer
>>61292
We must make the whole world lad, for the good of ladkind.
>> No. 61296 Anonymous
10th August 2018
Friday 11:12 pm
61296 spacer
>>61287
A Tory Party investigation into whether he breeched their code of conduct meets none of the three criteria you laid out.
>> No. 61297 Auntiefucker
10th August 2018
Friday 11:20 pm
61297 spacer
>>61296
Outsiders making a flood of complaints about you to your boss for your behaviour outside work is harassment m7.
>> No. 61298 Moralfag
11th August 2018
Saturday 3:46 am
61298 spacer
>>61297

True.

It's not like he holds public office or anything.
>> No. 61299 Crabkiller
11th August 2018
Saturday 8:59 am
61299 spacer
>>61298
Forget the investigation, he needs to be eaten as soon as possible. Imagine how much food one Boris could provide for a family on benefits.
>> No. 61300 Are Moaty
11th August 2018
Saturday 9:36 am
61300 spacer
>>61299
>IMAGINE HOW MUCH FOOD ONE BORIS COULD PROVIDE FOR A FAMILY ON BENEFITS

Families on benefits don't need to worry about affording food these days. Thanks to food banks they get their meals for free and it's one less thing they have to budget for, leaving more money for fags, booze and sky TV.
>> No. 61301 Moralfag
11th August 2018
Saturday 9:38 am
61301 spacer

20180811_093710.jpg
613016130161301
My news app today.
>> No. 61302 Are Moaty
11th August 2018
Saturday 10:02 am
61302 spacer
>>61300

And if they're foreign they get a free limousine to take them round because they can't read the road signs! it's ridiculous.
>> No. 61303 Moralfag
11th August 2018
Saturday 10:09 am
61303 spacer
>>61302
Our indigenous doleys have cottoned on to this. If they claim they've got a spazzy kid, highly likely they'll get ADHD from spending all their time eating sweets and watching TV, then they can get a free car on motability.
>> No. 61304 YubYub
11th August 2018
Saturday 9:55 pm
61304 spacer
"this foreign nonsense is ridiculous but shouldn't be banned" - quintessentially British view
>> No. 61305 Billbob
11th August 2018
Saturday 11:01 pm
61305 spacer

morons.jpg
613056130561305
Show your face or fuck off, get back to bongo bongo 4th century shitland and stop telling people it gets you closer to god. Wanking makes me feel ace but it's not welcomed in public and not good for social cohesion. Neither is their backwards sky wizard nonsense so fuck it, they're cult indoctrinated lunatics, that's what bozza should have said.
>> No. 61306 YubYub
12th August 2018
Sunday 12:52 am
61306 spacer
>>61305
>Wanking makes me feel ace but it's not welcomed in public
I'm not sure sure about that.

>> No. 61308 Are Moaty
12th August 2018
Sunday 3:18 am
61308 spacer
>>61306

SOUTHERN PUFFS
>> No. 61310 Searchfag
12th August 2018
Sunday 10:34 am
61310 spacer
Probably has something to do with his new strategist being Steve Bannon. It's a dog whistle to the right, in support of a future leadership bid.
>> No. 61311 YubYub
12th August 2018
Sunday 10:47 am
61311 spacer
>>61310
What's wrong with dog whistles? What have people got against them?
>> No. 61312 Anonymous
12th August 2018
Sunday 10:54 am
61312 spacer
>>61310
No, it's just saying something looks like letterboxes.

Because that's the most important thing you thick carpet-bagger.
>> No. 61313 YubYub
12th August 2018
Sunday 12:19 pm
61313 spacer
>>61312
Sure, it's "just" that, if you strip it of all its racial, political, and sociological context because you're mentally incapable of understanding the issue better than a Ladybird Book.
>> No. 61314 Crabkiller
12th August 2018
Sunday 12:27 pm
61314 spacer
>>61313
>RACIAL

How can you be racist against a religion? Would mocking a white woman in a burqa be fair game? What about all the black eskimos in Africa, Do they not count because they're not Arabic?
>> No. 61315 R4GE
12th August 2018
Sunday 12:42 pm
61315 spacer
>>61314
No, they don't count because they're in Africa.
>> No. 61316 Anonymous
12th August 2018
Sunday 12:48 pm
61316 spacer
>>61313
'Its bad because i want it to be bad'.
>> No. 61317 Searchfag
12th August 2018
Sunday 1:19 pm
61317 spacer
>>61314
>HOW CAN YOU BE RACIST AGAINST A RELIGION?

Like I said, you're operating at Ladybird level. Do your own research.
>> No. 61318 R4GE
12th August 2018
Sunday 2:33 pm
61318 spacer
>>61317
That's what is ultimately so depressing about the current discourse. Trump, Corbyn, Johnson - they're normalising thick people.
>> No. 61319 Auntiefucker
12th August 2018
Sunday 2:45 pm
61319 spacer
>>61318

Corbyn doesn't give the impression of being thick -- if anything he's sincere and speaks in a pretty measured way. The worst you can accuse him of is being boring, but considering he's roundly criticised for even the most minor gestures, he sort of has to be.

Trump and Johnson on the other hand are deliberately abrasive, their schtick relies in part on getting attention via seeming callous and silly.
>> No. 61320 Anonymous
12th August 2018
Sunday 2:49 pm
61320 spacer
>>61319

>Corbyn doesn't give the impression of being thick

Really? He comes across as a naive idiot to me. You can be sincere and measured and also stupid.
>> No. 61321 Are Moaty
12th August 2018
Sunday 3:03 pm
61321 spacer
>>61320

I don't see it, he doesn't have any less a sophisticated world view than any other politician.
>> No. 61322 Crabkiller
12th August 2018
Sunday 3:06 pm
61322 spacer
>>61321

That's not a particularly high bar.
>> No. 61324 Paedofag
12th August 2018
Sunday 3:20 pm
61324 spacer
>>61318
Corbyn isn't a thicko, he's just boring.
Johnson isn't a thicko, he just plays one on TV.
Trump ... well two out of three ain't bad.
>> No. 61325 Samefag
12th August 2018
Sunday 3:50 pm
61325 spacer
Lads, I just saw two women on the bus wearing niqaabs and speaking foreign. Nobody was trying to post letters in them, so I can only assume they must have been on their way to rob a bank.
>> No. 61326 Anonymous
12th August 2018
Sunday 4:42 pm
61326 spacer
>>61317
>DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH.

I've done some research and it's telling me you're talking out of your arse.
>> No. 61327 Searchfag
12th August 2018
Sunday 8:17 pm
61327 spacer
TRUE STORY. I KNOW SOMEONE WHO FOILED A BANK ROBBERY BY POSTING A WEIGHTY LETTER INTO WHAT HE THOUGHT WAS A POST BOX JUST OUTSIDE THE BANK, BUT IT WAS ACTUALLY A WOMAN IN A BURKA WHO WAS ABOUT TO ROB THE BANK.
>> No. 61328 R4GE
12th August 2018
Sunday 8:31 pm
61328 spacer

4F0B453B00000578-6052495-image-a-105_1534085149978.jpg
613286132861328

>> No. 61329 Anonymous
12th August 2018
Sunday 10:03 pm
61329 spacer
>>61328
>If sex with consent is ok then presumably sex without consent is too?
Oh Christine.
>> No. 61330 Ambulancelad
12th August 2018
Sunday 10:14 pm
61330 spacer

neil-hamilton-300-image-1-805185518.jpg
613306133061330
>>61329
What did they do? I know they did something rotten but I can't remember what it was.
>> No. 61331 Paedofag
12th August 2018
Sunday 11:42 pm
61331 spacer
>>61330
Well Neil took cash for questions in Parliament and had to resign as a minister, and then after that a slightly nutty woman alleged that they were involved in sex games in an East London flat, where she, allegedly, was raped.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/may/10/conservatives.politics1
>> No. 61332 Are Moaty
12th August 2018
Sunday 11:48 pm
61332 spacer
>>61331

I can't imagine a worse hell than finding yourself at a geriatric Tory MP sex party.
>> No. 61333 Ambulancelad
12th August 2018
Sunday 11:56 pm
61333 spacer
>>61332

Your stands of hell are too low, at the very least it is not boring. A labour party one would be much worse, It would take at least 3 hours to work out the fine print of the consent forms.
>> No. 61334 Anonymous
13th August 2018
Monday 1:48 am
61334 spacer
>>61332
I am right with you - I mean look at them in >>61330 - imagine their sex-faces.
>> No. 61335 Crabkiller
13th August 2018
Monday 2:45 am
61335 spacer
>>61334
Thanks for the image, lad. Now my dreams will be haunted by Chrissy and Mostyn's cum mugs.
>> No. 61337 Paedofag
13th August 2018
Monday 6:27 am
61337 spacer

Christine Hamilton Miss Great Britain t7kI6bJEIXKl.jpg
613376133761337
>>61334>>61335
I bet she's a game bird.
>> No. 61342 Billbob
14th August 2018
Tuesday 7:31 am
61342 spacer

31ab488a-5d9e-46bb-a420-7731a4627cfc.jpg
613426134261342
>>61337
They always say that repressed religious girls are the gamiest.
>> No. 61501 Samefag
9th September 2018
Sunday 8:27 am
61501 spacer
A Scout master dismissed by the Scout Association for comparing a eskimo leader in the organisation in a niqab face veil to the Star Wars villain Darth Vader has accepted damages and legal costs from the movement.

Brian Walker, 63, received a payment of £1,500 in an out-of-court settlement and withdrew a discrimination claim due to go to court in Bristol in November. Walker sent a private email to the Scout movement’s official magazine last year to complain it was promoting Shamanism while playing down its Christian origins.

He wrote: “You spend more time promoting eskimos, lesbians, homosexuals, bisexuals, transgender. [Lord] Baden-Powell [who founded the organisation on Christian lines] would be horrified.” He singled out an article featuring a female eskimo Scout leader said to be taking girls canoeing while wearing a full Shamanismic veil. He wrote: “Hello! Canoeist [sic] don’t dress like this . . . they will most likely drown wearing that Darth Vader tent!”

He also disputed the claim it was not a barrier, saying: “Her outward appearance is enough to frighten children and animals.”


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/payout-for-scout-leader-in-darth-vader-veil-row-zbghgmrct

Success, lads. The tide is turning. It's acceptable to compare them to Darth Vader.
>> No. 61524 Anonymous
9th September 2018
Sunday 9:20 pm
61524 spacer
>>61501
£1500? Seems like the Scouts were fairly confident they'd win the case, no?
>> No. 61527 Auntiefucker
9th September 2018
Sunday 9:36 pm
61527 spacer
>>61524
>, NO?

Lad. You've been told about this.
>> No. 61528 Anonymous
9th September 2018
Sunday 9:43 pm
61528 spacer
>>61524
Yeah, £1500 to settle an employment tribunal is basically "fuck off and leave us alone". If they thought they were gonna lose, you'd get another zero on the end of that easy.
>> No. 61529 Auntiefucker
9th September 2018
Sunday 9:51 pm
61529 spacer
>>61527

Fuck off with your petty whining m7. /iq/ is strictly for serious talk about serious business. That's why it's got its own special colour and font and everything.
>> No. 61530 Ambulancelad
9th September 2018
Sunday 9:52 pm
61530 spacer
>>61527
Do you think I care, or nah?
>> No. 61531 R4GE
9th September 2018
Sunday 10:02 pm
61531 spacer
>>61527
That's untrue. We had a discussion about this about four years ago and it's fine, I remember it well.
>> No. 61534 Crabkiller
9th September 2018
Sunday 11:17 pm
61534 spacer
>>61528
It's not really an employment tribunal if it's volunteering for the scouts is it?

Choice language, but he's got a point. It's completely impractical for someone in a niqab to try and supervise a bunch of kids in canoes.
>> No. 61535 Anonymous
9th September 2018
Sunday 11:53 pm
61535 spacer
>>61534
No, but it still costs them money all the same. That sort of money basically says "here's your money back, now drop it before it costs us both even more". In a case like this, if you're awarded costs, you don't get everything. You get somewhere between half and two-thirds depending on what things you're claiming, what court you're in, what judge hears your case and the closing price of small haddock in Peterhead on a Wednesday. You can reclaim every penny spent if and only if the other side have been a complete shower of cunts.

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password