Is England headed for the trash bin of History, or will it become a Muslim CUNT-ry?

British Government Dhimmitude Watch


Passport photograph of girl’s bare shoulders rejected ‘as it may offend’.
A five-year-old girl’s passport application was rejected because her photograph showed her bare shoulders.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20060814npassport14.jpg
Hannah Edwards’s mother, Jane, was told that the exposed skin might be considered offensive in a Muslim country.

The photograph was taken at a photo-booth at a local post office for a family trip to the south of France. Because of the way the camera was set up, the picture came out showing Hannah’s shoulders.

The family had it signed and presented it at a post office with the completed form but were told that it would not be accepted by the Passport Office. A woman behind the counter informed them that she was aware of at least two other cases where applications had been rejected because a person’s shoulders were not covered.

Mrs Edwards, a Sheffield GP, said: “I was incensed. I went back home and checked the form. Nowhere did it say anything about covering up shoulders. If it had, I would have done so, but it all seems so unnecessary.

“This is quite ridiculous, I followed the instructions on the passport form to the letter and it was still rejected. It is just officialdom pandering to political correctness.”

Hannah Edwards’s mother, Jane, was told that the exposed skin might be considered offensive in a Muslim country.

How soon before we are all made to wear the laundry so as not to offend the Muslims?

How about THEM taking off all the shit THEY wear

cause they offend us??????????????

More lies.

what is?

what is a LIE?

busybody said:

what is?

Click to expand...

That is from the same bullshit site that I showed to be a lying pile of crap the other day. It's the one that claimed that the British police asked muslims for permission before the arrests. A lie that was exposed IN THE SAME FUCKING ARTICLE. You have ceased to be serious, all you do now is post lies. I'm done with you.

what site?

show me!

are you saying THIS STORY is a LIE?

that it didnt happen?

that the NEWSPAPER that reported it

MADE IT UP??????????????

does the Telegraph have a HABIT of making stuff up?

do they LIE?

did this NOT happen at all?

why do you always DENY REALITY?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/14/npassport14.xml

busybody said:

does the Telegraph have a HABIT of making stuff up?

do they LIE?

did this NOT happen at all?

why do you always DENY REALITY?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/14/npassport14.xml

Click to expand...

I thought Great Britain was a sovereign state?

Hannah Edwards’s mother, Jane, was told that the exposed skin might be considered offensive in a Muslim country.

The photograph was taken at a photo-booth at a local post office for a family trip to the south of France . Because of the way the camera was set up, the picture came out showing Hannah’s shoulders.

Since they were traveling to a Muslim country, I can understand the concern of the Passport Office.

Muslims giving orders in England!

Foreign policy and terrorism
If you are at a very, very loose end this lunchtime and have access to Sky News, you can see me debate (scheduled for 1.30pm BST) the supposed links between foreign policy and terrorism with Asgahr Bukhari, chairman of the Muslim Public Affairs Committee.

UPDATE: I arrived back at my office after the programme to an email from Stephen Pollard asking, "Who was that oaf debating with the chap from MPAC?" I don't blame Stephen for finding it an unilluminating discussion. It went like this.

Mr Bukhari asserted it was obvious that the reason for domestic terrorism was foreign policy, because that's what the 7/7 bombers had said was their motivation. I responded that this was largely nonsense, and - even in the form of the notorious letter published at the weekend, some of whose signatories were more serious personalities than Mr Bukhari - inflammatory nonsense at that. It was inflammatory because it insinuated, without its signatories' having the candour to state openly, that in pursuing our policies and forming our alliances we get what's coming to us. And it was largely nonsense because it showed ignorance of recent international history. In the 1990s, our principal ally the United States had fought three times to rescue a threatened Muslim population - in Kuwait, Bosnia and Kosovo - and also pursued a vigorous diplomacy to try to secure a two-state territorial settlement between Israel and an independent Palestine. Yet in that decade the Islamists had atttacked the USS Cole and blown up two embassies in East Africa.

Mr Bukhari repeated the point he had first thought of and told me I could "take a jump" (though whether this was from anywhere in particular or merely into the air he did not make clear). In response to the presenter, Kay Burley, I commented that I had been careful to say it was largely rather than entirely nonsense to suggest a link between Anglo-American foreign policy and terrorism, because it was clearly true that Islamists were angered by what we stood for. I saw no remedy for this, however, as there was no course open to us that would mollify a movement that objected to western powers' enabling an independent East Timor to emerge from Indonesian domination (for bin Laden regards Timor as part of the Muslim world), and found offensive our belief in women's emancipation and rights for homosexuals. I slightly lost track of what Mr Bukhari was saying at this point, but I said that it would be more useful if a supposedly representative Muslim organisation devoted itself to bread-and-butter issues of employment and discrimination, rather than making demagogic statements on foreign affairs. (As I reminded Mr Bukhari, his organisation has been caught in the past - and on its own admission - using an image from a neo-Nazi web site in order to accompany its anti-Israel material.)

Mr Bukhari appeared to criticise me for examining his organisation's web site. He insisted it was time for journalists to listen to Muslims, and that we should "talk about this like adults". I thought this was quite funny, because he'd spent most of the previous ten minutes trying to shout me down.

wazzaa matter SEAN

put me on IGGY?

Does the TELEGRAPH lie?

Did this not happen?

How soon before all are foreced to become MUSLIM?

I guess we can ONLY believe SOME newspapers

Only the ones that PRAISE the MUSLIM KILLERS

The others

are LIARS!

Hannah is a lovely wide-eyed little girl in a summer dress, a perfectly appropriate way to dress in our culture.

But our officials must bow down before Shari’a because, after all, Muslims know that it is Allah’s law.

But by bit, for very practical reasons (as the officials see them), Shari’a is becoming the standard, and our culture cowers and appeases it.



"GREAT" Britian

Fucking JOKE!

England a TURD WORLD wanna be Cunt-ry

More LIES

Whites BAD

We need COLOREDS

'Too many white faces on the BBC news'
By Hugh Davies


(Filed: 14/08/2006)



The BBC was yesterday plunged into a row over its foreign reporting after its new "diversity czar" said there were too many white journalists reporting from non-white nations, particularly in Africa.

Mary Fitzpatrick said that she was tired of repeatedly seeing programmes where the situation was "here we are in Africa, and here's a white person saying, well, look at these people".

She said it was vital that BBC news reflected the audience that it was serving, with "valid and culturally accurate voices speaking."

She added: "I would prefer to see somebody who understands that culture, understands what's going on and can say, 'Look with me because I am part of this'. It feels more authoritative and more involved."

Rajeh Omaar, the Somali-born reporter who made his reputation reporting from Baghdad, has recently left to work for al-Jazeera, saying Western news organisations were perpetrating "a fraud" on their viewers with misleading coverage of the war in Iraq.

Miss Fitzpatrick told The Observer that the BBC's team of foreign correspondents should come from the same ethnic background as the country they were reporting from.

The BBC said last night it was "absurd" to suggest that correspondents of the calibre of Fergal Keane, John Simpson, Jeremy Bowen and Orla Guerin "lack credibility with our audiences because they are white".

"We have a number of reporters from ethnic minorities who cover stories around the world."

Good to know France is now considered a Muslim country.


The only outfit that won't be offensive....

http://www.traderscity.com/images/arabwoman.gif

SeanH said:

That is from the same bullshit site that I showed to be a lying pile of crap the other day. It's the one that claimed that the British police asked muslims for permission before the arrests. A lie that was exposed IN THE SAME FUCKING ARTICLE. You have ceased to be serious, all you do now is post lies. I'm done with you.

Click to expand...

Perhaps that link and incident are bogus, but you can't deny Muslims have engaged in NUMEROUS comparably dumbassed incidents (like shooting people for watching World Cup soccer games in Somalia). Considering people have died in Muslim countries for not covering themselves as much as some atavist imam or cleric thinks they have, I find the passport story to be completely plausible on its face, even if it was later debunked.

ObsideanWarrior said:

Perhaps that link and incident are bogus, but you can't deny Muslims have engaged in NUMEROUS comparably dumbassed incidents (like shooting people for watching World Cup soccer games in Somalia). Considering people have died in Muslim countries for not covering themselves as much as some atavist imam or cleric thinks they have, I find the passport story to be completely plausible on its face, even if it was later debunked.

Click to expand...

where do YOU get its BOGUS?

are you like SEAN, that DENY all that makes the cunt-ry look like its giving into Muslim craziness?

Its from a reputable newspaper

are you saying the PAPER LIES?

what DOESNT ANGER and PROVOKE the MUSLIMS?


why shouldnt the be targeted?

after all, if you have BUGS in your apt, you dont spray the dog, do you?

Top Muslim policeman slams UK "terror profile" plan By Paul Majendie
19 minutes ago



LONDON (Reuters) - A top British Muslim policeman has warned that any moves to "terror profile" airline passengers would create a new offence -- "traveling whilst Asian."

Media have reported the government is discussing with British airport authorities a system of profiling -- where security staff focus their search efforts on people they regard as suspicious on grounds such as ethnicity and religion.

Such a move could spark outrage among Britain's Muslims but aviation experts said profiling was vital to break the gridlock at airports, in chaos since last week due to tightened security after police said they foiled an Islamist plot to bomb planes.

Former British police chief John Stevens said airport bottlenecks could be reduced by careful targeting, with "young Muslim men" a focus.

Metropolitan Police Chief Superintendent Ali Desai, one of Britain's top Muslim police officers, said of the plan: "What you are suggesting is that we should have a new offence in this country called 'traveling whilst Asian'."

"What we don't want to do is actually alienate the very communities who are going to help us catch terrorists," he told BBC Newsnight on Monday.

Sharply aware of the political sensitivities involved, Transport Department officials have refused to answer any questions on profiling proposals.

"Our security measures at airports are layered. Some measures are visible. Others we are not prepared to discuss. That plays into the hands of terrorists," a department official told Reuters.

Many of Britain's 1.7 million Muslims accuse the police of unfairly targeting their community in their crackdown on terrorism after last year's suicide bomb attacks on London's transport system by Islamist militants that killed 52 people.

Since 2000, police have arrested over 700 people -- many of them Muslims -- under tough anti-terrorism laws but have brought only a handful to court. The vast majority have been released without charge.

Muhammad Abdul Bari, general secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain, was eager to dispel a siege mentality, saying "If you treat a community as a problem community, you are not going to get support from them."

Asked what he thought passenger profiling might provoke, he told Sky News: "It could end up in racism unfortunately."

"If the profiling is done on the basis of race and religion, it will be wrong, it is not going to work."

From the Independent:

Muslim leaders have urged Ruth Kelly, the Secretary of State for Communities, to support Islamic family law in Britain to stop youths joining Islamic extremists...Dr Pasha said he was not seeking sharia law for criminal offences but he said Muslim communities in Britain should be able to operate Islamic codes for marriage and family life. "In Scotland, they have a separate law. It doesn't mean they are not part of the UK. We are asking for Islamic law which covers marriage and family life. We are willing to co-operate but there should be a partnership. They should understand our problems then we will understand their problems. He said that Ms Kelly had said she would "look sympathetically at all the suggestions" that had been made.




Lets hope that the "secretary of state for communities" was just being polite. It ought to go without saying that this is a terrible idea. For the state to differentiate people by reference to their religious affiliation is a punch in the face to the notion of individuality and, quite, obviously a recipe for more division, additional balkanization and increased 'communal' strife. It also enshrines the idea that the most significant part of someone's identity is always their faith. It may be for some people (I suppose - although, as a general rule, I would be amazed), but it is no part of the government's business to assert it. In fact at a time of rising Islamic extremism, it's the government's interest to contradict it.

Meanwhile, I suppose it would be rude of me to ask who was it, exactly, that elected these 'community' leaders.

get more sand so you can bury your head


UK Muslims Demand Special Rights and Sharia Law


Radical Islamic front groups in Britain have an overabundance of shameless audacity. Following the exposure of an Islamic terror plot to blow up a dozen airliners, Muslim leaders are now demanding special holidays and shari’a law: Muslims call for special bank holidays.

Muslim leaders summoned to talks with the Government on tackling extremism in their midst called for public holidays to mark their religious festivals.

The Whitehall meeting was set up in response to last week’s airline bomb plot discovery.

Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly had prepared an uncompromising message on the need to tackle dangerous radicalism.

But, in what she admitted were ‘sharp’ exchanges, some senior Muslim figures turned the tables yesterday and made a series of demands which also included the introduction of Sharia law for family matters.

Dr Syed Aziz Pasha, secretary general of the Union of Muslim Organisations of the UK and Ireland, said: ‘We told her if you give us religious rights, we will be in a better position to convince young people that they are being treated equally along with other citizens.’




An interesting viewpoint: only by receiving special treatment and instituting a medieval religious legal code can they be treated “equally.”