political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Saturday Open Thread
I'm not likely to be posting much today so let's have an open thread for you to discuss whatever takes your fancy. Comment moderation is off so please be responsible.
Dear Marvin, I am an attractive 30 something, successful businesswoman in the fashion industry however I regularly find myself introduced to middle aged lotharios who drone on endlessly about flood damage and second-house tax exemptions as though I am interested. What should I do to rid myself quickly of these unwelcome intruders without causing offence (in case they one day become P.M.) K.M. (London and Wiltshire)
Dear K.M. when you are introduced to such creeps keep absolutely quiet for one minute while they talk on trying to impress you (two minutes if they are someone you recognize off the telly). At that point interrupt politely and tell them that you find their conversation absolutely fascinating and ask for their phone number. Then take their leave which they will by now be desperate to do so as to tell their friends that YOU have just asked for THEIR phone number. See?
This will bring the intrusion to a swift and pleasant conclusion for both of you while avoiding the possibility that they might ask you for your number. The nuisance will quickly disappear and you can dispose of the note with their phone number when next visiting the ladies'.
Well, when the cat is away Etc! The muslim council of Britain(why no Great in the title?)has warned us that the British Nation is getting like "Nazi Germany" in our treatment of muslims and 'his people feel persecuted! He objects to islamic terrorists being called islamists and he thinks we British should be much more understanding towards muslims and shouldnt "label all muslims terrorists". He also states that we ourselves(British people) are mainly to blame for the muslim suicide killers(+Jews of course) because we dont do as we are told!
PS I wonder why they are still here if Great Britain is so cruel and oppressive? Surely they would be far happier in Iran Etc?
A little joke I heard the other day... What has slightly less hair and parachutes into Maidstone and the Weald from A list airlines?? Guesses please....
Is anyone here as incensed as I am about the young lady with the Muslim headscarf who is suing the owner of a beauty salon because the owner wouldn't hire her because said Muslin young lady wouldn't take off her headscarf? Now the whole point of hair and beauty salons is to have nice looking people with great hair advertising the salon. What was the salon owner supposed to do? Not only did the young lady refuse to remove her headscarf to work but she was also a dog! Not a great advert for a trendy hair salon methinks. So now she gets to sue the owner for hurt feelings and some liberal judge will decide in favour of her and the poor salon owner is out of business. Nice work if you can get it.
they are still here because the grand plan is to turn Great Britain into an Islamic Republic. Over the past 30 years our liberal elite have done more to make this ever more certain than any terrorists could ever hope to do.
His Grace thought things might turn to matters Islamic here this morning, in light of the MCB's and Dr Bari's pronouncements that the UK should adapt to Islam as much as Muslims adapt to British culture.
This is appalling arrogance from a man who is himself an immigrant, and he is comprehensively rebuffed at His Grace's blog.
Good article - re picture of Dr Bari. Am I alone in thinking he is in possession of what looks like a cheap syrup? Or is he just having a bad hair day?
I am not a racist, indeed I am married to an extremely well-educated, enlightened and decidedly brown moslem lady, but England is a white Christian country and it is the aspirations of that white Christian country that the immigrant community aspires to. Australian Treasurer Peter Costello had it right when he said "If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you". We should be allowed similarly to express our views without being branded Nazis.
Is it just me or is this blog not what it used to be? No good comment at all these days this is less a Blog and more a way for Dale to shout about the little bits of tele he has done. Which doesnt make for a very good blog. Think this will be be my last visit.
lady finchley [11.16 AM] It's worse than you think. The Moslem girl will probably lose her case, because not all judges are bonkers. But the employer will still be out of pocket. She will incur the all the trouble and expense of defending the case with no hope of recovering her costs from the unsuccessful claimant.
What message will this send out to employers? 'Don't employ Moslem girls. They could be trouble.'
Yet again, well meaning legislation has exactly the opposite result to that intended.
"Is it just me or is this blog not what it used to be? No good comment at all these days this is less a Blog and more a way for Dale to shout about the little bits of tele he has done. Which doesnt make for a very good blog. Think this will be be my last visit"
Ooh goody!I hope you do not come back.
(If you had been bothered, Iain has had a major bereavement to deal with. If you were a regular reader you would know that Iain is, ahem, proud of his acheivements, but also very much at the top of the game so he has a right to be.)
I cannot say what I would like to say to you, Mr Anon, because Iain tends to be very polite and sticky about calling people anything that rhymes with Berkshire Hunt. And before you say it, I am one of his sternest critics and disagree with him about nearly everything)
You could make this blog "more interesting" if you took the time to think, write a comment and respond to other posters.
Anonymous @11.41, the German Jews were very assimilated into German culture, and preferred to think of themselves as German first, Jewish second.
The situations are not relative, because the historic backgrounds are so different.
I think it is more useful to look at the different attitudes to living in the UK demonstrated by the Hindu and Muslim communities here.
It is my direct experience that whilst the Hindu community remain proud of their culture and religion, they demand no special privileges or rights from the host community. The Islamic community, on the other hand, has been sadly tarnished by some of its influential members who have played heavily on the white Leftist apologists-for-the-Empire brigade.
I read Dr Bari's intrview: the full text is here. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/10/nterr110.xml&page=1
Some of his ideas and statements are sensible. Some are just hostages to fortune.
Basically if you read carefully, what he is effectively saying is some (not all) Muslim immigrants are ignorant and badly educated. they and their children are easily lead. The Muslim religion is good.
Of course, he omits to say other less good things.
Basically it could be used as a good advert to stop Muslim immigration from Pakistan or Bangladesh...
I am glad that I am not the only one astounded by the breathtaking arrogance and denial of Dr Bari.
Dr Bari said: "Britain must, he warns, beware of becoming like Nazi Germany".
(Sorry, just wiping the full-fat coke I just snorted off my screen.)
Sorry "Doctor", but I'll pass on your invitation to "adopt muslim culture"
I've had enough with excuses for terrorism, subjugation of women including the glorification of domestic violence (husbands "discipline your wives"), female genital mutilation and the burkha.
Honestly Dr Bari, if you want to live in a more "islamic" culture, allow me to pay for your one-way ticket on the next plane leaving for a totaltarian islamo-state and see how you get on there.
Why was Nigel Hastilow forced to resign and yet the head of the Muslim Council of Great Britain is still in post, after this morning's revelation that he condones the stoning of women and gays as long as
"It depends what sort of stoning and what circumstances,"
(All you poofs hanging about in this blog should stop whingeing about your right to wear silver hot pants and just be glad that people like me will stand shoulder to shoulder with you when the Caliphate comes.)
Troll Patrol - I'm with you and have commented on Bari's rug several times in the past. We should not be surprised by the drivelling idiocies issuing from a jerk who goes out and about with that joke carpet on his head. The first time I saw him, I thought he had moulded camel dung onto his noggin.
Islam is a cult, not a religion. It's a mind-control outfit. From the time they're tiny, they have to pray five times a day. Meaning, they spend their waking hours planning to go to prayers, or actually praying, or coming back from prayers. And the rest of their lives are full of restrictions and obsessive rituals that they have to obey. This is what is called mind control. I have often said that mohammad was the L Ron Hubbard of his day.
Lady Finchley, yes, a real bow-wow and an uppity one at that. I think the salon owner will prevail. Who would be motivated to get their hair styled by someone who had a shroud wrapped around her head? We expect spritely, pretty people with trendy hairstyles and nails to attend to us in the beauty salon, not a manatee in a babushka.
Is there any way we can get the salon owner's email address so we can send her messages of support?
OTOH, maybe the woof-woof could offer her services to that other icon of glamour, Dr Bari?
It was only about 9 or 10 years ago that mosques in Great Britain were as rare as rocking horse shit and you never heard "leaders of the muslim community" spouting off on TV.
Now they're hardly ever off the screen demanding this, that, and the other and telling us what a bunch of racists we are, and there's a bloody mosque on every other street corner in every other town and city in the country.
It's almost unbelievable how things have changed under 10 years of these New Labour scum who seem intent on flooding the country with even more third world gobshites, freeloaders, and criminals.
Does Brown's mate Ronnie Cohen pay tax in this country?
How about big Labour donors the Hindujas?
What about those other big Labour donors the Mittals?
How much does big Labour donor Lord Sainsbury pay in tax and how much is "ofshore"?
And what about the Labour government giving the trade unions millions of pounds in taxpayers money as "grants", folowed by the same unions then donating several millions to the Labour Party? Sounds like a sort of money laundering of tax revenue to the Labour party to me.
Ah Verity I knew I could count on you! Woof! Hopefully some rich benefactor will hear of the salon owner's plight and pay for her 'defence'. Oh it makes my blood boil.
And on to the Italian story - interesting how the Italians can derogate from the Yoo-man Rights law and rid their country of undesirables but we still don't. The Romanians are only too glad to get rid of their dregs but Italy has finally turned the table. It's not like we don't have enough of our own home-grown scum is it? When I think of the serial rapist from Sierra Leone not getting deported because some loony judge (is he not the husband of some Labour politician)said he had a right to a family life here and he didn't get on with his granny in Sierra Leone. Awwwwwwww. What about our rights? What about the rights of the women who were raped by him? I'd kick his butt straight back to Sierra Leone but not before I performed a little surgery first.
Tone Made Me Do It - That was in very bad taste! No cat would lay a paw on the likes of Bari. Cats are fussy and Bari's rug is enough to make a cat laugh.
(Maybe a gay wigmaker was having his revenge. Miaow.)
Nick Clegg has apparantly goofed floating his idea of spending 2.5bn on the poorest kids to get the kind of investment in their education (that, Westminster School-educated Clegg got with his), without saying where the bread to pay for it comes from.
Can a politician nowadays make uncosted promises without a caning from the media?
Any lawyers, here? Regarding this triumphant looking muslima who is going to sue the owner of a trendy beauty salon because the salon-owner wouldn't give her a job if she insisted on wearing a table-cloth wrapped around her head ... would that not be regarded as a frivolous case?
Clearly, this woman's clients would run a mile before letting something from the Stone Age at their hair.
It would be nice if she got fined for wasting the court's time.
Next up, a muslim bint who wants to be a pole dancer but wants to wear a burqa.
Since this is an open thread I would be interested in opinions:
I think Iain should do an article sometime about X-Prizes. http://www.xprize.org/ For those who don't know (almost everybody) they are a way of encouraging the free market to invest in space development, because the NASA & ESA bureaucrats are crap at it.
In 50 years your grandchildren will be lamenting that no British government were willing to do something as obviously sensible as put up a few billion (payable only on success) for the Moon.
If I never hear another word from these Global Warming wassocks again, it would be too soon. Here I am trying to recover with a double brandy after shoveling 250 meters of one meter deep snow from around my house ...and it's only the second week of November. I've not seen anything like it for years. It's that bloody cold it would freeze the spheres off a none ferrous anthropoid. If that nonsensical, bullshit-baffles-brains Gore idiot shows his smarmy face round here, he'll be needing major surgery to have the shovel removed from were I'm thinking of stuffing it!
It has been set up and is financed by the big money to help bring in a Fascist Europe. By deliberately creating hatred between the common people of this once free great nation.
These shit cunts represent nothing other then the big money that causes all the violent conflicts in the world. Almost none of them know this, but then that is the nature of The Beast.
Just ignore them. I wish the BBC would. But then promoting violent conflict around the world is the BBC's job. So I will not be holding my breath on that one.
Remember we are all human beings. We are united by our common humanity and religion.
Muslims are good, fine, cultured, educated, and clearly wonderful people. A people the British should be very proud to have sharing their world with them.
These brainwashed self defeating crazies at the MCofGB represent our brothers of the Muslim faith far less then even the chief rabbi himself does.
Please please please don't be fooled again. The big money is deliberately promoting death violence and chaos yet again.
They have taken the piss once too many times.
Show the brainwashers, that at least this tiny part of humanity has grown up enough to see though their evil transparent lies. Before it is too late for all of us.
Verity you are right to concentrate your hatred now days on the people that deserve all and every bit of it.
Bloody Lawyers. With blood on their hands, pretending to give a shit about people while lining their own pockets.
They would cheerfully sell their moral backbones for a fast buck quicker and cheaper then their own grandmothers.
Whats worse we elect the same to run the world. Which makes us as responsible for all the truly shit things they get up to almost as much as they are.
For example. Who in there right mind would lie for a murderer to assist them to walk free. In the full and safe knowledge that the violent creep is as guilty as hell.
Other then the ex American football stars mother or a BLOODY LAWYER. Just for hard cash and an increased reputation for lying?
OK a politician would but then many many of them are lawyers as well. To our everlasting shame.
BTW
Global warming may be very man made indeed at least in certain select areas.
A machine for changing the climate in specific regions and capable of creating hurricanes in places like Florida was invented 20 odd years ago. Nazi scientists were said to have invented such a thing as far back as 1945.
A well know documented fact that the BBC and funny enough NOT the bias BBC webb site will not allow even a discussion about.
This should make people wonder and wonder BIG TIME.
Call it conspiracy or not. It does not mean it is not true.
Can you imagine how much easy money and therefore power such a cheap and easy to produce machine could give someone like friends of Al Gore, Zac Goldsmith or George Bush?
Do not give the ruling elites of the world any benefit of any doubt whatsoever. The BBC even less so.
They have proved time and time again not to deserve any at all.
Ask questions until you get clear and reliable answers and then look for more questions.
I am fed up with this anti-lawyer rubbish from people, such as “atlas shrugged“. It is so much easier to blame lawyers for their clients failings. That is if you are completely brain dead.
Laws are not made by lawyers but by parliament. If you do not like laws blame politicians but don’t blame the lawyers.
When you go to the U.N. and listen to the President of Iran then I suppose you blame his interpreter for the rubbish he speaks.
I remind Verity that her great mentor, indeed the Minister Mentor, Lee Kwan Yew, was a lawyer. No ranting about him and yet he had was employed in a radically multiracial practice at the beginning of his career.
Hey! How did I get into Histrov's reply to Atlas Shrugged? Also how did Lee Kuan Yew's name get in?
Certainly, I am an admirer of LKY, but how does that connect to today's Open Thread, as we haven't alluded to him, and, more particularly, with the thoughts of Atlas Shrugged?
I think that it is time to explode some myths about solicitors. Myths which have been aired this week in depth.
The solicitors profession was a favoured and wealthy profession until the mid 1980s. An ordinary high street solicitor was a reasonably wealthy man and a partner in a high street firm earned about the same as a successful executive. However, the punitative taxation policies of the Wilson/Callaghan government meant that the salaries of executives had to be raised to allow them to live comfortably and to allow companies to recruit talent. It was impossible for solicitors to raise their fees to keep up and “the rot” started. Differentials between high street solicitors and company executives started to become marked.
Then Austin Mitchell M.P. attacked the solicitors monopoly on conveyancing. The Law Society, the solicitors governing body, was forced to scrap the minimum scale fees for conveyancing and competition became fierce. Not least because of the invention of licensed conveyancers, who were allowed to do conveyancing. Solicitors were soon forced to reduce their conveyancing fees to the extent that some firms were charging the same fee in 1989 as they had been in 1970. Not the same fee in real terms but the same fee. Think of the amount of inflation between 1970 and 1989.
High street solicitors were forced to diversify. This diversification had to increase markedly when the recession of the late 80s and early 90s hit. High street solicitors embraced Legal Aid and took up litigation. Legal Aid boomed and the bill went up and up. However, Legal Aid work was never as profitable as private conveyancing work had been. The bureaucracy was much greater and the hourly rates were lower. Solicitors overheads did not decrease but their income was reduced. The most profitable high street work became probate work, minor commercial work and volume conveyancing. Volume conveyancing was an attempt to make money from doing a very large amount of conveyancing work. The relatively profitable areas of legal aid were matrimonial, personal injury work and crown court criminal work.
Criminal defence work came under attack first. In 1994 the then government introduced the Police Station and Court Duty Scheme. This meant that any solicitor could apply to be on the duty scheme and many did. The firms who had specialised in criminal defence work started losing clients because criminal clients are not loyal. Those firms had previously normally “picked up” their clients by referrals from the Police. The then government then encouraged criminal defence firms to apply for franchises. Any firm could apply for a franchise and non franchised firms could still do criminal defence work. Franchised firms were paid at a higher rate. In 2001 franchising was replaced by an exclusive contract. Those who did not have the contract could not do the work. Rates were hardly raised at all and criminal defence solicitors became an underpaid underclass. The hourly rate for advocacy in the magistrates court is £62.35. Less than a plumber gets. The hourly rate for preparation is about £50.00 and the hourly rate for travel and waiting is about £24.00. Fixed fees were introduced, so the criminal defence solicitor often doesn’t actually get the hourly rate. Obviously, the hourly rate does not go straight into the solicitors back pocket. He has huge overheads. Rent on premises (say £32,000 a year), rates (say £12,000 a year) staff costs (at, say £25,000.00 to £31,000.00 for each qualified solicitor and £15,000.00 to £20,000.00 for each secretary), insurance (say £5000-£10,000) and practising certificate fees (about £1000.00 for each qualified solicitor). Criminal defence solicitors were finding that they were not making a profit on magistrates court work. Not least because the government did not even bother to ask the magistrates to change their “bloc listing” policy. So, most cases are listed for 9.45 a.m. and then heard at some time during that day. Result, a lot of solicitors sitting in court for a lot of the day earning £24.00 an hour for their firms. The only way of making money was to do a lot of crown court work, which is more intensive. The government’s criminal defence legal aid bill kept on going up. So, now, crown court fees will be cut by 20% for 6 months and then competitive tendering will be introduced. Result, collapse of at least ½ to ¾ s of current solicitors firms. Partners (owners) of criminal defence solicitors firms now face ruin.
All other parts of the legal aid system face reductions and all legal aid is becoming unprofitable. Personal Injury work was removed altogether and replaced by an extremely bureaucratic no win/no fee system.
So, Iain now you see why that solicitor tried to charge you so much for probate.
The non-criminal defence high street solicitor has been losing out as well but not so dramatically. They have concentrated on volume conveyancing, probate and some minor commercial work. Times have been quite good because of the property boom but all is set to change, not just because of an impending recession but because of the Government’s Legal Services Act. Tesco and all such institutions are going to be allowed to compete with solicitors in provision of conveyancing and probate services from 2011. It is estimated that ½ to ¾ s of high street solicitors firms will disappear. Partners in those firms will face potential financial ruin. The high street firms can be categorised as the middle class of the profession.
That leaves the upper class, the commercial city solicitors, whose clients are wealthy companies who can afford to pay hourly rates of say £400.00 for a partner. New Labour has, of course, appeased these millionaires. The same Legal Services Act, which will destroy their middle class compatriots, will further enrich them. They are to be allowed to float their firms on the stock market and obtain outside funding. Some will become multi-millionaires, even billionaires.
Moral : The big city firms still favour Oxbridge graduates. The high street and criminal defence have no future and you would be mad to encourage your children to become solicitors, as only a tiny minority get into big city firms. Anyone who qualifies as a solicitor within the next few years but who does not get in to a city firm, faces almost certain unemployment.
Also, New Labour knows that solicitors have no national support and so they can get away with attacking them with impunity. Consequently, their actions reveal their true inclinations. Which are: Support the rich and powerful; destroy the poor and middle class and do not ask public servants to reform outmoded ways of doing things even if such reforms would save a lot of money.
"Result, collapse of at least ½ to ¾ s of current solicitors firms. Partners (owners) of criminal defence solicitors firms now face ruin."
Should read
"Result, collapse of at least ½ to ¾ s of current criminal defence solicitors firms. Partners (owners) of criminal defence solicitors firms now face ruin."
“Atlas Shrugged” launched a vitriolic attack on lawyers. He alluded to his belief that Verity agreed with him, although my re-reading of her postings suggest that she didn’t.
My point about Lee Kwan Yew is to point out that not all lawyers are the devil incarnate. Although, King George III obviously did not agree with me, as his nickname for the Inns of Court and City Yeomanry, a regiment composed entirely of lawyers, was “The Devil’s Own”.
There are some serious issues about legal independence. Independent lawyers may be a pain in the backside but they are better than state suborned lawyers. Think of Andrey Januaryevich Vyshinskiy, Stalin’s odious Prosecutor - General or Roland Freisler, Chief Judge of the Nazi Peoples Court, who vigorously denounced and sentenced all opponents of the Nazi regime who came before him. Not all such lawyers met Freisler’s suitable fate (he was killed by a beam which struck him whilst he was sitting in his court during an allied bombing raid).
Freisler’s rebellious brother, Oswald, was actually expelled from the Nazi Party, for appearing as a defence lawyer in politically sensitive cases. Dictators don’t like defence lawyers.
Robert Mugabe also hates lawyers, specifically those who seek to uphold the Rule of Law.
Verity is right to allude to vexatious and frivolous legal actions. Actions which are forecast in the tabloids but which hardly ever materialise in court. If they do materialise then they can be quashed by a costs order. Say, £10,000.00 for a day in the High Court and all preparation leading to it. Costs orders are normally made against those who lose, not just those who start ridiculous law suits.
Can I have my twopenneth on lawyers (or a £150 an hour) people on Legal Aid should NOT be allowed to pick and choose but be represented by a Public Defender on a take it or leave it basis. Since the introduction of the PACE act I've seen multi million pound buisnesses spring up from what were one man band solicitors offices. All you need to do is adopt half a dozen bad families give them your mobile phone number sneak them a few packets of fags and you have a licence to print money.
Freedom (and M. Hristov)- I think Legal Aid should be granted only for the indigent to defend themselves in criminal cases. The public purse should not be financing their imagined wrongs and frivolous lawsuits in the civil courts.
If their case has any merit - and often even when it doesn't - they can find a law firm to take their case on a contingency basis.
No Legal Aid for civil cases.
Surely that islamic bint can find a sleazy firm of islamic lawyers? Dr Bari probably has several he could recommend.
A Public Defender System was established in this country in 2001. It has been scaled back because it is more expensive than private practice.
You cannot be suggesting that criminal defence practice is a "licence to print money". Anonymous was right to point out that the rates are lower then those paid to plumbers. Also, most plumbers are not "on call" all day and night.
M Hristov - I didn't suggest any such thing. I was referring to individuals with a clearly insane grievance having access to public funds to bring a civil suit. They should have to find a law firm that's willing to take their case on a contingency basis.
This islamic bow-wow wants to sue a trendy hairdressers because they didn't want a "stylist" in a headscarf scaring the customers off.
This is where "religious discrimination" laws wreck normal society.
In any event, the pillowcase on her head isn't even a religious requirement. That it's a part of their religion is a piece of knowing hostility towards the host culture and doesn't appear anywhere in their koran.
Turkey has banned the niqab (that's the grotesque one where only the eyes show - and even then, behind netting) by law. Headscarves are allowed, but get this: head-scarved women cannot enter a public building wearing one. Same in Morocco. So we're behind Morocco.
In France, they can't work in any government office wearing a scarf. That includes schools. Funny how all the muslimas manage to accommodate themselves to this when it suits them.
In any case, the headscarf is nowhere mentioned in the koran. They're using it as a weapon. This arf-arf couldn't get a job in a beauty salon anyway, due to ugliness.
I see in The Telegraph that this islamic attention-seeker had been turned town for twenty-five other jobs - so Sarah Desrosiers was number 26 to say 'no' and she is the one being sued.
Something doesn't ring right here. I cannot imagine any sane lawyer taking this case on.
Can anyone get the salon's email address? It's called Wedge.
Can anyone get the salon's email address? It's called Wedge.
They don't seem to have an e-mail address. The website is www.wedgehair.co.uk and the telephone number is 020 7833 2228.
This reminds me of another case a few years ago. An African woman applied for a job as a hotel receptionist but when she called in to the hotel the manager told her that the vacancy was already filled. She later found out that it hadn't been filled and she referred the hotel to the Race Relations Board.
The manager explained that the poor woman was quite unsuitable for the job as she was absolutely grotesque in appearance and would have driven away potential guests. He was simply trying to spare her feelings.
The fact is, there is absolutely no requirement in islam to wear bin liners, table cloths, fright masks, sheets on their backs. Nowhere.
As in, nowhere in the koran. Nowhere in the surahs.
All that is ever said is that women should dress "modestly". As it also stipulates similar behaviour for men - that they too should dress "modestly" - this burqa pleading in our country is lying and manipulative.
Either: They know they're lying when they claim it's a religious requirement. OR
They don't know it's not a religious requirement because they've never read the koran for themselves.
So, ignorance on their part.
Or they've been misled by the word of ignorant imams. (There are no actual qualifications for these fellows, and no central authority. They wing it.) But this would mean the bint had been too lazy to read the koran for herself. Or just trusted that some man had read it for her.
This salon owner is not guilty of discrimination by any measure. (And even if she were, SO WHAT? Surely our exciting Human Resources industry would confirm that, when filling a slot, some people get turned down for jobs? This aggressive woman had been turned down by 25 previous companies. That's a lot.
(It's Sarah Desrosiers' business. She financed it. She set it up. She put the hours in.)
I've visited Sarah's awful, hostile website, but it's for a specific audience and this wouldn't be important except she's socialist.
They're having a benefit for her somewhere in London and any funds taken in over her legal costs are going to be donated to the Drugs And Homeless Initiative.
Well, that lets me off the hook.
This doesn't alter the case that Sarah is the wronged party and I hope she prevails.
I'm very suspicious of Brown's vision to increase the school leaving age to 18.
Where are all these additional school places coming from?
Or, forgive my scepticism, did NuLab under the mantra of education,education, education,deliberately exaggerate the numbers of new schools that were required, and after a glut of building now realise they have insufficient school children to fill them.
They certainly did in Bristol where at least two new schools have half the anticipated pupils...yet they are building even more!
54 comments:
Good Luck in your Interview, Iain
Dear Marvin,
I am an attractive 30 something, successful businesswoman in the fashion industry however I regularly find myself introduced to middle aged lotharios who drone on endlessly about flood damage and second-house tax exemptions as though I am interested. What should I do to rid myself quickly of these unwelcome intruders without causing offence (in case they one day become P.M.)
K.M. (London and Wiltshire)
Dear K.M.
when you are introduced to such creeps keep absolutely quiet for one minute while they talk on trying to impress you (two minutes if they are someone you recognize off the telly). At that point interrupt politely and tell them that you find their conversation absolutely fascinating and ask for their phone number. Then take their leave which they will by now be desperate to do so as to tell their friends that YOU have just asked for THEIR phone number. See?
This will bring the intrusion to a swift and pleasant conclusion for both of you while avoiding the possibility that they might ask you for your number. The nuisance will quickly disappear and you can dispose of the note with their phone number when next visiting the ladies'.
Open thread?
Well, when the cat is away Etc!
The muslim council of Britain(why no Great in the title?)has warned us that the British Nation is getting like "Nazi Germany" in our treatment of muslims and 'his people feel persecuted! He objects to islamic terrorists being called islamists and he thinks we British should be much more understanding towards muslims and shouldnt "label all muslims terrorists". He also states that we ourselves(British people) are mainly to blame for the muslim suicide killers(+Jews of course) because we dont do as we are told!
PS
I wonder why they are still here if Great Britain is so cruel and oppressive? Surely they would be far happier in Iran Etc?
A little joke I heard the other day... What has slightly less hair and parachutes into Maidstone and the Weald from A list airlines?? Guesses please....
tehe tehe
Is anyone here as incensed as I am about the young lady with the Muslim headscarf who is suing the owner of a beauty salon because the owner wouldn't hire her because said Muslin young lady wouldn't take off her headscarf? Now the whole point of hair and beauty salons is to have nice looking people with great hair advertising the salon. What was the salon owner supposed to do? Not only did the young lady refuse to remove her headscarf to work but she was also a dog! Not a great advert for a trendy hair salon methinks. So now she gets to sue the owner for hurt feelings and some liberal judge will decide in favour of her and the poor salon owner is out of business. Nice work if you can get it.
poohbear
they are still here because the grand plan is to turn Great Britain into an Islamic Republic. Over the past 30 years our liberal elite have done more to make this ever more certain than any terrorists could ever hope to do.
"I wonder why they are still here if Great Britain is so cruel and oppressive?"
Hitler said much the same thing to the Jews in Germany, poohbear.
His Grace thought things might turn to matters Islamic here this morning, in light of the MCB's and Dr Bari's pronouncements that the UK should adapt to Islam as much as Muslims adapt to British culture.
This is appalling arrogance from a man who is himself an immigrant, and he is comprehensively rebuffed at His Grace's blog.
Cranmer
Good article - re picture of Dr Bari. Am I alone in thinking he is in possession of what looks like a cheap syrup? Or is he just having a bad hair day?
I am not a racist, indeed I am married to an extremely well-educated, enlightened and decidedly brown moslem lady, but England is a white Christian country and it is the aspirations of that white Christian country that the immigrant community aspires to. Australian Treasurer Peter Costello had it right when he said "If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you". We should be allowed similarly to express our views without being branded Nazis.
Is it just me or is this blog not what it used to be? No good comment at all these days this is less a Blog and more a way for Dale to shout about the little bits of tele he has done. Which doesnt make for a very good blog. Think this will be be my last visit.
lady finchley [11.16 AM] It's worse than you think. The Moslem girl will probably lose her case, because not all judges are bonkers. But the employer will still be out of pocket. She will incur the all the trouble and expense of defending the case with no hope of recovering her costs from the unsuccessful claimant.
What message will this send out to employers? 'Don't employ Moslem girls. They could be trouble.'
Yet again, well meaning legislation has exactly the opposite result to that intended.
another nobody wrote:
"Is it just me or is this blog not what it used to be? No good comment at all these days this is less a Blog and more a way for Dale to shout about the little bits of tele he has done. Which doesnt make for a very good blog. Think this will be be my last visit"
Ooh goody!I hope you do not come back.
(If you had been bothered, Iain has had a major bereavement to deal with. If you were a regular reader you would know that Iain is, ahem, proud of his acheivements, but also very much at the top of the game so he has a right to be.)
I cannot say what I would like to say to you, Mr Anon, because Iain tends to be very polite and sticky about calling people anything that rhymes with Berkshire Hunt. And before you say it, I am one of his sternest critics and disagree with him about nearly everything)
You could make this blog "more interesting" if you took the time to think, write a comment and respond to other posters.
Anonymous @11.41, the German Jews were very assimilated into German culture, and preferred to think of themselves as German first, Jewish second.
The situations are not relative, because the historic backgrounds are so different.
I think it is more useful to look at the different attitudes to living in the UK demonstrated by the Hindu and Muslim communities here.
It is my direct experience that whilst the Hindu community remain proud of their culture and religion, they demand no special privileges or rights from the host community. The Islamic community, on the other hand, has been sadly tarnished by some of its influential members who have played heavily on the white Leftist apologists-for-the-Empire brigade.
I read Dr Bari's intrview: the full text is here.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/10/nterr110.xml&page=1
Some of his ideas and statements are sensible. Some are just hostages to fortune.
Basically if you read carefully, what he is effectively saying is some (not all) Muslim immigrants are ignorant and badly educated. they and their children are easily lead.
The Muslim religion is good.
Of course, he omits to say other less good things.
Basically it could be used as a good advert to stop Muslim immigration from Pakistan or Bangladesh...
Nick Clegg's a gonner
http://timrollpickering.blogspot.com/2007/11/well-cleggs-gonner.html
You Grace
I am glad that I am not the only one astounded by the breathtaking arrogance and denial of Dr Bari.
Dr Bari said: "Britain must, he warns, beware of becoming like Nazi Germany".
(Sorry, just wiping the full-fat coke I just snorted off my screen.)
Sorry "Doctor", but I'll pass on your invitation to "adopt muslim culture"
I've had enough with excuses for terrorism, subjugation of women including the glorification of domestic violence (husbands "discipline your wives"), female genital mutilation and the burkha.
Honestly Dr Bari, if you want to live in a more "islamic" culture, allow me to pay for your one-way ticket on the next plane leaving for a totaltarian islamo-state and see how you get on there.
Why was Nigel Hastilow forced to resign and yet the head of the Muslim Council of Great Britain is still in post, after this morning's revelation that he condones the stoning of women and gays as long as
"It depends what sort of stoning and what circumstances,"
(All you poofs hanging about in this blog should stop whingeing about your right to wear silver hot pants and just be glad that people like me will stand shoulder to shoulder with you when the Caliphate comes.)
I was going to book a holiday in Umbria but Italy's not what it was what with all these Romanian and Congolese sex murderers running amok.
Is there a prospective Mussolini waiting in the wings ready to clean it all up I wonder?
Troll Patrol - I'm with you and have commented on Bari's rug several times in the past. We should not be surprised by the drivelling idiocies issuing from a jerk who goes out and about with that joke carpet on his head. The first time I saw him, I thought he had moulded camel dung onto his noggin.
Islam is a cult, not a religion. It's a mind-control outfit. From the time they're tiny, they have to pray five times a day. Meaning, they spend their waking hours planning to go to prayers, or actually praying, or coming back from prayers. And the rest of their lives are full of restrictions and obsessive rituals that they have to obey. This is what is called mind control. I have often said that mohammad was the L Ron Hubbard of his day.
Lady Finchley, yes, a real bow-wow and an uppity one at that. I think the salon owner will prevail. Who would be motivated to get their hair styled by someone who had a shroud wrapped around her head? We expect spritely, pretty people with trendy hairstyles and nails to attend to us in the beauty salon, not a manatee in a babushka.
Is there any way we can get the salon owner's email address so we can send her messages of support?
OTOH, maybe the woof-woof could offer her services to that other icon of glamour, Dr Bari?
The dude and the dud? Two dogs with one stone.
It was only about 9 or 10 years ago that mosques in Great Britain were as rare as rocking horse shit and you never heard "leaders of the muslim community" spouting off on TV.
Now they're hardly ever off the screen demanding this, that, and the other and telling us what a bunch of racists we are, and there's a bloody mosque on every other street corner in every other town and city in the country.
It's almost unbelievable how things have changed under 10 years of these New Labour scum who seem intent on flooding the country with even more third world gobshites, freeloaders, and criminals.
Was this in any of their manifestos. Was it hell!
Dr Bari was asked: "Is stoning ever justified? "It depends what sort of stoning and what circumstances".
Quality. Tells me everything I need to know about "the religion of peace".
Can we get to the bottom of Lord 'donation' Ashcroft and Con Airways?
Does he pay tax to GB (Gordon or Great, take your pick)?
Is his 'favours' acceptable in British law?
Why doesn't Dave come clean?
Where's Yates of the Yard when we...you need him? Busy chasing Blair shadows?
Come on...you know as well as I do that when you scratch a Tory a minimum of a five year stretch is a possibility.
Simple questions. Simple answers.
Does 'Lord' Ashcroft pay tax in the UK or not?
Is he footing the bill all over the UK or not?
Lord 'Fingers'Archer, 'Saint Johnny' Aitken and Neil'Honest' Hamilton are excused from this survey.
Gary
CC: Yates/Ian Blair/Gov Belize Central Bank/Ronald Biggs/Ex President for Life Marcos/Dave.
Does Brown's mate Ronnie Cohen pay tax in this country?
How about big Labour donors the Hindujas?
What about those other big Labour donors the Mittals?
How much does big Labour donor Lord Sainsbury pay in tax and how much is "ofshore"?
And what about the Labour government giving the trade unions millions of pounds in taxpayers money as "grants", folowed by the same unions then donating several millions to the Labour Party? Sounds like a sort of money laundering of tax revenue to the Labour party to me.
Sleazy bunch labour, aren't they!
Ah Verity I knew I could count on you! Woof! Hopefully some rich benefactor will hear of the salon owner's plight and pay for her 'defence'. Oh it makes my blood boil.
And on to the Italian story - interesting how the Italians can derogate from the Yoo-man Rights law and rid their country of undesirables but we still don't. The Romanians are only too glad to get rid of their dregs but Italy has finally turned the table. It's not like we don't have enough of our own home-grown scum is it? When I think of the serial rapist from Sierra Leone not getting deported because some loony judge (is he not the husband of some Labour politician)said he had a right to a family life here and he didn't get on with his granny in Sierra Leone. Awwwwwwww. What about our rights? What about the rights of the women who were raped by him? I'd kick his butt straight back to Sierra Leone but not before I performed a little surgery first.
If you want to vent your spleen on militant liberals you can visit the newly formed Liberal Conspiracy Watch.
troll patrol said...
"Am I alone in thinking he is in possession of what looks like a cheap syrup? Or is he just having a bad hair day?"
100% certain.
I wonder if he gives it a saucer of milk when he gets home?
Does this mean we won't be hearing from the Muslim Council on windy days?
Tone Made Me Do It - That was in very bad taste! No cat would lay a paw on the likes of Bari. Cats are fussy and Bari's rug is enough to make a cat laugh.
(Maybe a gay wigmaker was having his revenge. Miaow.)
Nick Clegg has apparantly goofed floating his idea of spending 2.5bn on the poorest kids to get the kind of investment in their education (that, Westminster School-educated Clegg got with his), without saying where the bread to pay for it comes from.
Can a politician nowadays make uncosted promises without a caning from the media?
What price political honesty?
Any lawyers, here? Regarding this triumphant looking muslima who is going to sue the owner of a trendy beauty salon because the salon-owner wouldn't give her a job if she insisted on wearing a table-cloth wrapped around her head ... would that not be regarded as a frivolous case?
Clearly, this woman's clients would run a mile before letting something from the Stone Age at their hair.
It would be nice if she got fined for wasting the court's time.
Next up, a muslim bint who wants to be a pole dancer but wants to wear a burqa.
Since this is an open thread I would be interested in opinions:
I think Iain should do an article sometime about X-Prizes.
http://www.xprize.org/
For those who don't know (almost everybody) they are a way of encouraging the free market to invest in space development, because the NASA & ESA bureaucrats are crap at it.
In 50 years your grandchildren will be lamenting that no British government were willing to do something as obviously sensible as put up a few billion (payable only on success) for the Moon.
If I never hear another word from these Global Warming wassocks again, it would be too soon. Here I am trying to recover with a double brandy after shoveling 250 meters of one meter deep snow from around my house ...and it's only the second week of November. I've not seen anything like it for years. It's that bloody cold it would freeze the spheres off a none ferrous anthropoid. If that nonsensical, bullshit-baffles-brains Gore idiot shows his smarmy face round here, he'll be needing major surgery to have the shovel removed from were I'm thinking of stuffing it!
Screw the Muslim council of Britain BIG TIME.
It has been set up and is financed by the big money to help bring in a Fascist Europe. By deliberately creating hatred between the common people of this once free great nation.
These shit cunts represent nothing other then the big money that causes all the violent conflicts in the world. Almost none of them know this, but then that is the nature of The Beast.
Just ignore them. I wish the BBC would. But then promoting violent conflict around the world is the BBC's job. So I will not be holding my breath on that one.
Remember we are all human beings. We are united by our common humanity and religion.
Muslims are good, fine, cultured, educated, and clearly wonderful people. A people the British should be very proud to have sharing their world with them.
These brainwashed self defeating crazies at the MCofGB represent our brothers of the Muslim faith far less then even the chief rabbi himself does.
Please please please don't be fooled again. The big money is deliberately promoting death violence and chaos yet again.
They have taken the piss once too many times.
Show the brainwashers, that at least this tiny part of humanity has grown up enough to see though their evil transparent lies. Before it is too late for all of us.
Verity you are right to concentrate your hatred now days on the people that deserve all and every bit of it.
Bloody Lawyers. With blood on their hands, pretending to give a shit about people while lining their own pockets.
They would cheerfully sell their moral backbones for a fast buck quicker and cheaper then their own grandmothers.
Whats worse we elect the same to run the world. Which makes us as responsible for all the truly shit things they get up to almost as much as they are.
For example. Who in there right mind would lie for a murderer to assist them to walk free. In the full and safe knowledge that the violent creep is as guilty as hell.
Other then the ex American football stars mother or a BLOODY LAWYER. Just for hard cash and an increased reputation for lying?
OK a politician would but then many many of them are lawyers as well. To our everlasting shame.
BTW
Global warming may be very man made indeed at least in certain select areas.
A machine for changing the climate in specific regions and capable of creating hurricanes in places like Florida was invented 20 odd years ago. Nazi scientists were said to have invented such a thing as far back as 1945.
A well know documented fact that the BBC and funny enough NOT the bias BBC webb site will not allow even a discussion about.
This should make people wonder and wonder BIG TIME.
Call it conspiracy or not. It does not mean it is not true.
Can you imagine how much easy money and therefore power such a cheap and easy to produce machine could give someone like friends of Al Gore, Zac Goldsmith or George Bush?
Do not give the ruling elites of the world any benefit of any doubt whatsoever. The BBC even less so.
They have proved time and time again not to deserve any at all.
Ask questions until you get clear and reliable answers and then look for more questions.
I am fed up with this anti-lawyer rubbish from people, such as “atlas shrugged“. It is so much easier to blame lawyers for their clients failings. That is if you are completely brain dead.
Laws are not made by lawyers but by parliament. If you do not like laws blame politicians but don’t blame the lawyers.
When you go to the U.N. and listen to the President of Iran then I suppose you blame his interpreter for the rubbish he speaks.
I remind Verity that her great mentor, indeed the Minister Mentor, Lee Kwan Yew, was a lawyer. No ranting about him and yet he had was employed in a radically multiracial practice
at the beginning of his career.
Hey! How did I get into Histrov's reply to Atlas Shrugged? Also how did Lee Kuan Yew's name get in?
Certainly, I am an admirer of LKY, but how does that connect to today's Open Thread, as we haven't alluded to him, and, more particularly, with the thoughts of Atlas Shrugged?
???
I think that it is time to explode some myths about solicitors. Myths which have been aired this week in depth.
The solicitors profession was a favoured and wealthy profession until the mid 1980s. An ordinary high street solicitor was a reasonably wealthy man and a partner in a high street firm earned about the same as a successful executive. However, the punitative taxation policies of the Wilson/Callaghan government meant that the salaries of executives had to be raised to allow them to live comfortably and to allow companies to recruit talent. It was impossible for solicitors to raise their fees to keep up and “the rot” started. Differentials between high street solicitors and company executives started to become marked.
Then Austin Mitchell M.P. attacked the solicitors monopoly on conveyancing. The Law Society, the solicitors governing body, was forced to scrap the minimum scale fees for conveyancing and competition became fierce. Not least because of the invention of licensed conveyancers, who were allowed to do conveyancing. Solicitors were soon forced to reduce their conveyancing fees to the extent that some firms were charging the same fee in 1989 as they had been in 1970. Not the same fee in real terms but the same fee. Think of the amount of inflation between 1970 and 1989.
High street solicitors were forced to diversify. This diversification had to increase markedly when the recession of the late 80s and early 90s hit. High street solicitors embraced Legal Aid and took up litigation. Legal Aid boomed and the bill went up and up. However, Legal Aid work was never as profitable as private conveyancing work had been. The bureaucracy was much greater and the hourly rates were lower. Solicitors overheads did not decrease but their income was reduced. The most profitable high street work became probate work, minor commercial work and volume conveyancing. Volume conveyancing was an attempt to make money from doing a very large amount of conveyancing work. The relatively profitable areas of legal aid were matrimonial, personal injury work and crown court criminal work.
Criminal defence work came under attack first. In 1994 the then government introduced the Police Station and Court Duty Scheme. This meant that any solicitor could apply to be on the duty scheme and many did. The firms who had specialised in criminal defence work started losing clients because criminal clients are not loyal. Those firms had previously normally “picked up” their clients by referrals from the Police. The then government then encouraged criminal defence firms to apply for franchises. Any firm could apply for a franchise and non franchised firms could still do criminal defence work. Franchised firms were paid at a higher rate. In 2001 franchising was replaced by an exclusive contract. Those who did not have the contract could not do the work. Rates were hardly raised at all and criminal defence solicitors became an underpaid underclass. The hourly rate for advocacy in the magistrates court is £62.35. Less than a plumber gets. The hourly rate for preparation is about £50.00 and the hourly rate for travel and waiting is about £24.00. Fixed fees were introduced, so the criminal defence solicitor often doesn’t actually get the hourly rate. Obviously, the hourly rate does not go straight into the solicitors back pocket. He has huge overheads. Rent on premises (say £32,000 a year), rates (say £12,000 a year) staff costs (at, say £25,000.00 to £31,000.00 for each qualified solicitor and £15,000.00 to £20,000.00 for each secretary), insurance (say £5000-£10,000) and practising certificate fees (about £1000.00 for each qualified solicitor). Criminal defence solicitors were finding that they were not making a profit on magistrates court work. Not least because the government did not even bother to ask the magistrates to change their “bloc listing” policy. So, most cases are listed for 9.45 a.m. and then heard at some time during that day. Result, a lot of solicitors sitting in court for a lot of the day earning £24.00 an hour for their firms. The only way of making money was to do a lot of crown court work, which is more intensive. The government’s criminal defence legal aid bill kept on going up. So, now, crown court fees will be cut by 20% for 6 months and then competitive tendering will be introduced. Result, collapse of at least ½ to ¾ s of current solicitors firms. Partners (owners) of criminal defence solicitors firms now face ruin.
All other parts of the legal aid system face reductions and all legal aid is becoming unprofitable. Personal Injury work was removed altogether and replaced by an extremely bureaucratic no win/no fee system.
So, Iain now you see why that solicitor tried to charge you so much for probate.
The non-criminal defence high street solicitor has been losing out as well but not so dramatically. They have concentrated on volume conveyancing, probate and some minor commercial work. Times have been quite good because of the property boom but all is set to change, not just because of an impending recession but because of the Government’s Legal Services Act. Tesco and all such institutions are going to be allowed to compete with solicitors in provision of conveyancing and probate services from 2011. It is estimated that ½ to ¾ s of high street solicitors firms will disappear. Partners in those firms will face potential financial ruin. The high street firms can be categorised as the middle class of the profession.
That leaves the upper class, the commercial city solicitors, whose clients are wealthy companies who can afford to pay hourly rates of say £400.00 for a partner. New Labour has, of course, appeased these millionaires. The same Legal Services Act, which will destroy their middle class compatriots, will further enrich them. They are to be allowed to float their firms on the stock market and obtain outside funding. Some will become multi-millionaires, even billionaires.
Moral : The big city firms still favour Oxbridge graduates. The high street and criminal defence have no future and you would be mad to encourage your children to become solicitors, as only a tiny minority get into big city firms. Anyone who qualifies as a solicitor within the next few years but who does not get in to a city firm, faces almost certain unemployment.
Also, New Labour knows that solicitors have no national support and so they can get away with attacking them with impunity. Consequently, their actions reveal their true inclinations. Which are: Support the rich and powerful; destroy the poor and middle class and do not ask public servants to reform outmoded ways of doing things even if such reforms would save a lot of money.
"Result, collapse of at least ½ to ¾ s of current solicitors firms. Partners (owners) of criminal defence solicitors firms now face ruin."
Should read
"Result, collapse of at least ½ to ¾ s of current criminal defence solicitors firms. Partners (owners) of criminal defence solicitors firms now face ruin."
“Atlas Shrugged” launched a vitriolic attack on lawyers. He alluded to his belief that Verity agreed with him, although my re-reading of her postings suggest that she didn’t.
My point about Lee Kwan Yew is to point out that not all lawyers are the devil incarnate. Although, King George III obviously did not agree with me, as his nickname for the Inns of Court and City Yeomanry, a regiment composed entirely of lawyers, was “The Devil’s Own”.
There are some serious issues about legal independence. Independent lawyers may be a pain in the backside but they are better than state suborned lawyers. Think of Andrey Januaryevich Vyshinskiy, Stalin’s odious Prosecutor - General or Roland Freisler, Chief Judge of the Nazi Peoples Court, who vigorously denounced and sentenced all opponents of the Nazi regime who came before him. Not all such lawyers met Freisler’s suitable fate (he was killed by a beam which struck him whilst he was sitting in his court during an allied bombing raid).
Freisler’s rebellious brother, Oswald, was actually expelled from the Nazi Party, for appearing as a defence lawyer in politically sensitive cases. Dictators don’t like defence lawyers.
Robert Mugabe also hates lawyers, specifically those who seek to uphold the Rule of Law.
Verity is right to allude to vexatious and frivolous legal actions. Actions which are forecast in the tabloids but which hardly ever materialise in court. If they do materialise then they can be quashed by a costs order. Say, £10,000.00 for a day in the High Court and all preparation leading to it. Costs orders are normally made against those who lose, not just those who start ridiculous law suits.
Histrov, Nowhere did I refer to "vexacious and frivolvous legal actions",although I would quite enjoy having done so as it's a zippy phrase.
Oh, wait a minute! Was this something to do with this terminarly ugly bint with a tablecloth on her head suing to be employed in a beauty salon?
Do I get my £5?
Can I have my twopenneth on lawyers (or a £150 an hour) people on Legal Aid should NOT be allowed to pick and choose but be represented by a Public Defender on a take it or leave it basis. Since the introduction of the PACE act I've seen multi million pound buisnesses spring up from what were one man band solicitors offices.
All you need to do is adopt half a dozen bad families give them your mobile phone number sneak them a few packets of fags and you have a licence to print money.
Freedom (and M. Hristov)- I think Legal Aid should be granted only for the indigent to defend themselves in criminal cases. The public purse should not be financing their imagined wrongs and frivolous lawsuits in the civil courts.
If their case has any merit - and often even when it doesn't - they can find a law firm to take their case on a contingency basis.
No Legal Aid for civil cases.
Surely that islamic bint can find a sleazy firm of islamic lawyers? Dr Bari probably has several he could recommend.
A Public Defender System was established in this country in 2001. It has been scaled back because it is more expensive than private practice.
You cannot be suggesting that criminal defence practice is a "licence to print money". Anonymous was right to point out that the rates are lower then those paid to plumbers. Also, most plumbers are not "on call" all day and night.
Poor old lawyers. My heart bleeds for you. Whinging bastards.
"Anonymous was right to point out that the rates are lower then those paid to plumbers. Also, most plumbers are not "on call" all day and night."
Maybe that is why Dave Camoron is thinking of becoming a plumber.
M Hristov - I didn't suggest any such thing. I was referring to individuals with a clearly insane grievance having access to public funds to bring a civil suit. They should have to find a law firm that's willing to take their case on a contingency basis.
This islamic bow-wow wants to sue a trendy hairdressers because they didn't want a "stylist" in a headscarf scaring the customers off.
This is where "religious discrimination" laws wreck normal society.
In any event, the pillowcase on her head isn't even a religious requirement. That it's a part of their religion is a piece of knowing hostility towards the host culture and doesn't appear anywhere in their koran.
Turkey has banned the niqab (that's the grotesque one where only the eyes show - and even then, behind netting) by law. Headscarves are allowed, but get this: head-scarved women cannot enter a public building wearing one. Same in Morocco. So we're behind Morocco.
In France, they can't work in any government office wearing a scarf. That includes schools. Funny how all the muslimas manage to accommodate themselves to this when it suits them.
In any case, the headscarf is nowhere mentioned in the koran. They're using it as a weapon. This arf-arf couldn't get a job in a beauty salon anyway, due to ugliness.
I see in The Telegraph that this islamic attention-seeker had been turned town for twenty-five other jobs - so Sarah Desrosiers was number 26 to say 'no' and she is the one being sued.
Something doesn't ring right here. I cannot imagine any sane lawyer taking this case on.
Can anyone get the salon's email address? It's called Wedge.
verity said...
Can anyone get the salon's email address? It's called Wedge.
They don't seem to have an e-mail address. The website is www.wedgehair.co.uk and the telephone number is 020 7833 2228.
This reminds me of another case a few years ago. An African woman applied for a job as a hotel receptionist but when she called in to the hotel the manager told her that the vacancy was already filled. She later found out that it hadn't been filled and she referred the hotel to the Race Relations Board.
The manager explained that the poor woman was quite unsuitable for the job as she was absolutely grotesque in appearance and would have driven away potential guests. He was simply trying to spare her feelings.
Thanks, Aardvark!
The fact is, there is absolutely no requirement in islam to wear bin liners, table cloths, fright masks, sheets on their backs. Nowhere.
As in, nowhere in the koran. Nowhere in the surahs.
All that is ever said is that women should dress "modestly". As it also stipulates similar behaviour for men - that they too should dress "modestly" - this burqa pleading in our country is lying and manipulative.
Either: They know they're lying when they claim it's a religious requirement. OR
They don't know it's not a religious requirement because they've never read the koran for themselves.
So, ignorance on their part.
Or they've been misled by the word of ignorant imams. (There are no actual qualifications for these fellows, and no central authority. They wing it.) But this would mean the bint had been too lazy to read the koran for herself. Or just trusted that some man had read it for her.
This salon owner is not guilty of discrimination by any measure. (And even if she were, SO WHAT? Surely our exciting Human Resources industry would confirm that, when filling a slot, some people get turned down for jobs? This aggressive woman had been turned down by 25 previous companies. That's a lot.
(It's Sarah Desrosiers' business. She financed it. She set it up. She put the hours in.)
Bushra Noah is giving mohammad a bad name.
I've visited Sarah's awful, hostile website, but it's for a specific audience and this wouldn't be important except she's socialist.
They're having a benefit for her somewhere in London and any funds taken in over her legal costs are going to be donated to the Drugs And Homeless Initiative.
Well, that lets me off the hook.
This doesn't alter the case that Sarah is the wronged party and I hope she prevails.
I'm very suspicious of Brown's vision to increase the school leaving age to 18.
Where are all these additional school places coming from?
Or, forgive my scepticism, did NuLab under the mantra of education,education, education,deliberately exaggerate the numbers of new schools that were required, and after a glut of building now realise they have insufficient school children to fill them.
They certainly did in Bristol where at least two new schools have half the anticipated pupils...yet they are building even more!
Post a Comment