Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Shurley Shome Mishtake


When I first saw this headline on ConservativeHome earlier today, I must admit I wondered what John Bercow had ever done to offend the French President... More haste, less speed, as my mother used to say. I always thought that was a ridiculous expreshun.

25 comments:

canvas said...

funny. I thought the same :)

It's surprising that France is so intolerant and doesn't respect religious freedom. Really a woman should have the right to wear whatever she chooses to wear...except for Jordan.

Anonymous said...

Ho! Ho! Very satirical.

londonmuslim said...

I've written an article about this on my blog which tries to expose Sarkhozy's hypocrasy

Alex said...

Sarkozy is a fine person to talk about whoshould and who shouldn't cover themselves up

He is the one just left of centre in this picture, although not in real life:

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2008/01/12/sarkozy_bruni_wideweb__470x324,0.jpg

Red Rag said...

Humour joins the long list of things you are totally useless at.

Peter said...

Sarkozy is right as usual.
It is a pity our politicians don't feel confident enough to make similar observations. But no doubt if they did the BBC would be down on them like a ton of bricks.

Anonymous said...

Bercow PLP needs either a smaller chair or more cushions.He has the look of an abandoned small boy in that big chair.

Verity said...

Canvas - Why do you say that France doesn't respect religious freedom? Are you under the impression that Mohammad wrote fashion copy on the side?

Kindly point to the passage in the Q'ran or in the Suras, where there are any passages on women's clothing. Just because some ignorant, illiterate imams propagate the myth (did you know there are no qualifications to be an imam?) as a means of control doesn't mean it's true. Just because a bunch of ignorant, attention-seeking girls/women in Britain choose to go out looking like every night is Hallowe'en doesn't mean they are so directed by their religion.

All - repeat - all that Mohammad ever said about dress was, women should dress "modestly". He said the same thing to men.

The burqa, the niqab and so on are sensible, and ancient - in other words, pre-dating Islam, which is a recent religion, desert wear devised to keep the blowing winds of the Sahara out of noses, mouths, ears and eyes. That is all. Men wear a folded keffiyah for the same reasons. It's an intelligent response to the sand and wind. I have also, I am serious, seen pictures of camels wearing a veil across their noses - for the same reason. This alone should give you a clue.

London Muslim, perhaps you should have devoted less time to your religious studies and more to English spelling?

Bird said...

Why are you running a Labour ad on your blog.
Well, if you must, could you tell the illiterate buggers that "less" jobs, etc. should read: "fewer" jobs, etc.

Bath plugs for the many, not the few said...

It seems the illiterate ad about cuts has now been cut.

Verity said...

Canvas, Alex and other proud upholders of the tradition of the subjugation of women, I might mention that it was under President Chirac and the then Minister of Education that France banned not just the burqa, but the hijab (the headscarf)in schools because it set Muslim girls apart from their classmates and they were prevented from fully integrating.

They were right. Social cohesion, Tony Blair, Jack Straw, Harriet Harman and other old student Marxists please note, is paramount for the wellbeing of a nation.

(France has already had a rule that anyone working in a government office cannot wear burqas or any other obviously religious gear for a long time.)

I was living in the France when the burqa was banned in schools, and it went through fairly smoothly, except for demonstrations from fathers who wanted to control their daughters.

Later, a couple of large surveys were done among Muslim women of daughters, away from the men, and they almost universally endorsed Chirac's move. Those mothers are themselves second generation, and they spoke of how isolated from the other girls they had felt when they were at school, with foreign-born parents and having to wear strange outfits that the other girls laughed at - how lonely, and how they had longed to fit in. All those mothers (away from a male audience) endorsed the move.

So perhaps as, Canvas, Alex and others, presumably you don't have a dog in this hunt, you should cease your ill-informed hectoring.

Bird said...

Did anyone see ITV's Tom Bradby get under Bercow's skin today?
He don't like it up him and it doesn't auger well for his tenure.
Can anyone get it up on Youtube?

Anonymous said...

what Verity said

Lady Finchley said...

Three cheers for the French Prez! For London Muslim who thinks this is hypocrisy - neither crucifixes or stars of David are allowed in schools either.

How can Muslims who wear this ostentatiously divisive garb expect to integrate and become part of the society of the host country. Note the word 'host'. They chose to emigrate and as such they are the ones who must adopt the custom of the country. My grandparents did it - why shouldn't they?

And if you want hypocrisy, just look at the hijab wearing women and girls, oh so modestly covering their hair but have heavily made up eyes. What is so modest about that? Which proves that the wearing of it in that case is a political statement.

As for burkhas, Verity is as usual correct, they are made for sand swept terrains - not for Dewsbury. Women have fought for ages to be in control of their own lives - we don't want reminders of slavery and ownership. If only the Government here had the cojones to ban them here.

Cut the Cant said...

Spot on Verity and Lady Finchley!!

This is all about women being second class citizens.

Anonymous said...

In the Commons last week, the MP for Keithley, Anne Cryer, asked for more school funds because 95% of 4 year olds could not speak english. Think on that, 4 year olds, almost certainly born in this country, with no large surge of immigration from that area in the last few years, can only mean one this. That there is an Asian ghetto, so insular that English is not spoken. If you want a good reason to ban things that make people insular, then Keithley is a good example.

Svenson said...

More haste, less speed?
My mother always told me it was more taste, less smack.
What do I know?

Anonymous said...

Sarkozy, Berlusconi and Merkel. The three of them are on my Axis of Awesome. By contrast, Brown, Hussein and Zapatero are on my Axis of Twattery. Try and guess why.

georgeorwellslittlesister said...

Also, there must be a health dimension to this form of clothing. Can it really be good for women's respiratory to constantly breath in the same tainted air? Particularly if they already have a cold, cough or any lung infection.
What a wonderful British solution - ban the burkha for reason of elf'n'safety.

Lady Finchley said...

Yes, George Orwell - there is an element of health to this. Women who wear burhkas all have vitamin D defenciencies.

Verity said...

The wearing of these fright outfits is shorthand for contempt for the host nation. They claim it's their religion, of course, because under Labour, the word "Muslim" is a free pass to aggression. And aggressive and vicious they are.

In London, I have twice been pushed off the pavement by a couple of ambulatory bin-liners As I had never been shoved off a pavement before anywhere in the world (including Islamic countries), this told me that this is part of the colonisation and subjugation of Britain. In the Caliphate, non-Muslims are tolerated, but they have to step off the pavement for Muslims to pass.

There are Muslim women refusing to take off their fright gear for their driver's licence photos because "it's against my religion". Bullshit. It's not. The people manning these places should have the nerve to ask to be shown the relevant passage in the Q'ran. Game, set and match. (Except the Labour government would have them arrested for "racism", apparently under the impression that a religion is genetic, like race, rather than a choice.)

Compare and contrast with Queen Rania of Jordan who doesn't even wear a wispy pretend veil over her stylish hair and beautiful face.

Incidentally, Morocco has banned the burqa and niqab in public, and women wearing the hijab (head scarf) are required to remove it to enter public buildings like post offices, schools and so on. And Morocco is a Muslim country. Similarly, Turkey, 95% Islamic (although it is a secular society) has banned the hijab in public. So now we're behind Morocco and Turkey.

Britain is the victim of a sly, destructive collusion between militant Islam and the socialist government.

Canvas, France is not "intolerant". They (quite rightly) hold their own society and civilisation in very high regard, and they're not going to have it diluted. Stick to hymning the praises of Obama, a subject you have studied with somewhat awesome enthusiasm.

Verity said...

Here's the dynamic, intelligent, achieving, modern British woman Saira Khan has to say about about wearing burqas in public in today's Mail:
http://tinyurl.com/kpgmyz

It validates everything I wrote earlier on this thread, and, of course, Ms Khan brings up some other valuable and interesting thoughts drawn from her own experience.

niarb ruoy esu said...

"In this largely Muslim country, Jordan, one religious tradition is increasingly a matter of choice. Approximately 60 percent of Jordanian women wear a veil.

Though QUEEN RANIA says she has never worn a veil, she understands why a woman would want to.

"We think it's a personal choice," she says.
"Unfortunately in the West people look at the veil as a sign of oppression or weakness.

This is not true as long as a woman is wearing it because of her belief. I always say we should judge a woman according to what's going on in their heads rather than what's going on top of their heads.""

Anna Raccoon said...

I blogged on this yesterday, Equality is one of the founding rights of the French republic, and they take it very seriously.

See HERE.

Verity said...

Use Your Brain - Obviously, Queen Rania is not going to criticise her husband's subjects for being over zealous in their "religious" (the burqa has nothing to do with Islam) observances. But in all her photographs, the Queen is beautifully coiffed, beautifully made up and dresses in haute couture.

If she were draped in long black curtains, she couldn't manage her stint as a Red Crescent ambulance driver.

You say 60 per cent of Jordanian women wear a veil. In that case, they've become radicalised since I was last there, at which time only the much older generation and rural women were clumping around in burqas.

Where did you get your 60 per cent figure?