Islamaphobia on the rise

Two Muslim women have claimed they were refused a bus ride because one had her face covered by a veil.

The 22-year-old students, of Slough, Berkshire, were in London and boarded a Metroline bus from Russell Square to Paddington on Tuesday.

But they said when they presented their tickets the driver told them they were a “threat” to passengers and ordered them off the bus.

The driver later allegedly refused to give his details and, irony of ironies, covered his face when the two women who had been refused service tried to video him.

This is another reason why tolerance and the rejection of authoritarianism is essential. The driver didn’t want to admit he was an Islamophobic little git (allegedly) he pretended he was acting to protect his passengers from the “threat” of a veiled woman.

As an example of what the legitimisation of discrimination can cause, it is very timely. I hope Philip Holobone is happy because it is people like him, and his reactionary campaign to ban the burqa and niqab which bring this  sort of behaviour into the mainstream.

[H/T AdamBienkov]

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Islamaphobia on the rise

  1. Oh dear, what a tit. surely as he works in public transport he is going to face some form of disciplinary for this?

    You can’t turn people away from your bus based on what they’re wearing surely?

  2. London bus drivers are an increasingly surly and aggressive bunch to all comers in my experience.

    Anyways. Tolerance.

    You are tolerant to veils and burqas, even though you don’t like them, finding them oppressive to women (as I do too).

    Slap yourself on the back for your tolerance, buy yourself a drink.

    I am not tolerant to veils and burqas, ergo I probably am a racist, a reactionary and possibly a member of UKIP.

    Except I am on an unaligned leftie who opposed the Iraq War, thinks we should withdraw our troops from Afghanistan and is probably one of your few posters who has actually physically fought fascists and the police protecting them (the NF in the ’70s).

    Tolerance is a two-way street, I have no problems with the way muslims dress, or their practices and traditions, so long as it does not impinge on my life (and I draw the line at sharia law, stoning a woman to death for adultery may not directly affect me but is simply barbaric).

    And the same goes for all other religions.

    If I was in a muslim country I would not walk about in just a pair of shorts necking beer and walk into someone’s house without removing my shoes. It is just a common courtesy, if nothing else.

    The same goes for the veil. It is a courtesy in this country not to cover your face, especially when talking to someone. Just that.

    I would not outlaw the veil, a cop arresting someone for wearing a veil would be ridiculous and counter-productive.

    But I would bring in civil sanctions against it. You want a driving licence? You don’t get one with a veil. You want a passport. Not with a veil (remember one of the 7/7 bombers escaped the UK by wearing a burqa).

    You want to access a public service (if there are any left after the ConDems are finished) like the NHS or Benefits, you remove your veil, as bikers do with helmets at banks etc, or hoodies do at some shopping centres. You want to work in a public service? No veil.

    Now I know my views on the veil will be as welcome as rabies in a guide dogs home on the left blogosphere, but there you go.

    Like I said knock yourself out for you tolerance.

    Posts calling me a racist or Islamophobe may commence here vvvvv.

    1. I agree with you about London bus drivers but think the rest of it you’re setting yourself up for a fall and to be some sort of blog martyr, which is weird and daft.

      I can’t speak for anyone but me, tolerance of bad ideas is a crime, in whatever form they may take. The bus driver telling the women to get off the bus was a bad idea, I’m not tolerant to that. Women having to cover their faces up for some religious purposes is also an awful idea. I have no tolerance for that either.

      But it is in what form that intolerance takes that is the key.

      I’m not going to tell anyone to stop being a cock (actually, if I was there I would’ve told the driver he was being a douche) or to take the burqa off but if they ask me, I’ll let them know that I do not like it.

      “It is a courtesy in this country not to cover your face, especially when talking to someone.”

      I think you’re stretching it there a wee bit.

      “You want a driving licence? You don’t get one with a veil. You want a passport. Not with a veil (remember one of the 7/7 bombers escaped the UK by wearing a burqa).”

      Again, this is weird as covered faces are not allowed in either of those two documents, if you’re talking about not being allowed to drive with a veil on, that’s fine, I’d have no problem with that law.

      My problem is, I have low tolerance for men that dress like shit and look like shit and smell of BO, they are pretty offensive but the idea of them not being allowed to work in the public sector or access the NHS or any other service is just unworkable and verging on the totalitarian.

      So your prediction of what your comment would incur was wrong, hopefully you’ll see that elements of your thought process are also a little on the fritz.

      1. They may not wear veils to obtain driving licences or passports, but they do once they have got them. I have a mate who saw a veiled muslim woman making a hell of a fuss at an airport about being asked to remove her veil at passport control. Eventually she had to be led away to a seperate room with women officials.

        Your problem with men that “dress like shit and smell of BO” sounds very much like an attack on ‘chavs’, attacks which our society tolerates all the time.

        Of course, what ‘chavs’ really means is some of the young working class, I bet you have no problem with shopping centres banning hoodies.

        I have a problem Mr Hoffman-Gill, with some of the north London middle-class that live round me in million pound gaffs who and appear to think they are the highest life-form the earth has ever produced and therefore entitled to do as they like, no matter how much it may incovenience anyone else.

        I’m not setting myself up to be any sort of “blog martyr”, blogs are just not that important, except to fellas like you.

        As for the rest of your post it’s not a rational argument, it’s just abuse isn’t it?

        “weird and daft…. elements of your thought process are also a little on the fritz”

        Yeah right…

        A ComRes poll found:

        64% said it should be illegal to wear a burkha/face veil in places like banks and airports, and

        61% said schools should be allowed to prevent teachers from wearing burkhas/face veils if they wish.

        Another poll found:

        22% agree with banning the Hijab in public places

        66% the Niqab, and

        72% the Burqa

        67% agreed that garments that conceal a woman’s face are an affront to British values.

        Do all these people have elements of their thought process that are a little on the fritz?

        Yes, we must leave it to it to bien pensant liberals like your good self to put us right.

        Finally to get back to bus drivers, “Muslim driver halts bus to kneel in aisle and pray”.

        (On a route I use a lot)

        I bet you’ll find room in tolerant, self-regarding self to tolerate this.

        http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23803267-muslim-driver-halts-bus-to-kneel-in-aisle-and-pray.do

        1. You’re using anecdotal evidence to make your point, the reality being that people wearing full face veils and thus, making a huge fuss over them can just smack of bullying.

          There are more pressing issues at hand.

          And no, I wasn’t inferring “chavs” I don’t like the term and find it pretty offensive.

          “I bet you have no problem with shopping centres banning hoodies.”

          Yes I do have a problem with that, your presumptions are getting tiresome, stick to fact based points, rather than opinion.

          “I have a problem Mr Hoffman-Gill, with some of the north London middle-class that live round me in million pound gaffs who and appear to think they are the highest life-form the earth has ever produced and therefore entitled to do as they like, no matter how much it may incovenience anyone else.”

          You are allowed to have a problem with them, just as they are allowed to have a problem with you being an embittered, chip-on-the-shoulder class warrior.

          Your tone suggests that you have some odd personal issue with me, for no reason other than I’ve pulled you up on your assumptions.

          I called you a blog martyr because you set yourself up to be attacked, when in reality, that was not the case. You also claim blogs don’t matter, we’ll see, if you keep returning here then obviously they do mean a great deal to you.

          “As for the rest of your post it’s not a rational argument, it’s just abuse isn’t it?”

          That’s not the case at all, where did I abuse you?

          I merely pointed out that your argument was built on strawmen that do not actually exist, thus, if you want to build an argument, you’ll have to do it on facts.

          I would like you to source the COmRes poll, I would be keen to know the polling group size.

          As I said, I do not feel it the place of the government to tell people what to wear, as I said, I am intolerant of lots of people’s dress codes but that doesn’t mean it should become law.

          Also, I have no idea why you feel the need to link to story about a Muslim bus driver stopping to pray, I have already made it clear I have no tolerance for religion at all.

          1. Just to clear up my first paragraph…

            You’re using anecdotal evidence to make your point, the reality being that people wearing full face veils in the UK are very limited and thus, making a huge fuss over them can just smack of bullying.

          2. What “anecodtal evidence” am I using, any more than you are using anecdotal evidence?

            “There are more pressing issues” Indeed and I comment on them, (but not as much as you, you’re all over the blogosphere like a madwoman’s shit) but this post is about burqas and veils so that is what I am commenting on now, capisce?

            “..you being an embittered, chip-on-the-shoulder class warrior”

            (and you say without irony you are not being abusive – despite having previously told me I am “weird and daft” and my “thought process is a little on the fritz.”)

            I’ve always found that the chippy, class warrior argument is only wheeled out when it is working upwards at the middle-class.

            When it is working downward and the middle class are attacking the working class no such arguments about “class war” apply. Instead politicians and metropolitan media feed us a line of bullshit about how necessary and vital these attacks are.

            And I think I’ve struck a sore point here as well, because let’s face it your very name strikes me that you are not a hardy-handed, member of the proletariat.

            It strikes me you are one of that very London middle-class I was talking about; greedy, selfish, pompous, self-regarding and with a massive sense of entitlement and not used to being contradicted.

            Thank god some of these bastards are going to feel the heat of the ConDems cuts and face hardship for the first time in their pampered lives and get a taste of what the working class have to put up with.

            And I have plenty to be “chippy” about; try growing up in north Manchester council estate and being sent to a secondary modern school which wrote you off at 11.

            The problem I have with you is you are an abusive, conceited middle-class tool who doesn’t don’t like having your arguments contradicted.

            And so long as you direct all that at me you can bet your sweet life I will return.

            Polls:

            The Independent commissioned ComRes to conduct a telephone poll among a representative sample of 1,016 Britons aged 18 and over on 27-28 January 2010.

            Later a Five News and YouGov poll revealed out of more than 2,000 respondents, 67% either agreed or strongly agreed with a British ban on burqas and veils.

            Total sample size of the Five News/YouGov survey was 2,205 adults.

            A Harris Interactive poll was conducted on behalf of the Financial Times.

            Asked whether they wished to follow the French government’s lead in seeking a ban on the wearing of the burka, 57% of Britons said yes and 26% no, with 18% unsure.

            It was conducted online among a representative sample of 1,097 Britons aged 16-64 between 3 and 10 February 2010, and also in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United States and China.

            http://www.brin.ac.uk/news/?tag=burka

            is that enough number crunching for you? It looks like you are in the minority doesn’t it?

            And as I said in my original post, I am NOT asking for a ban. I am asking for practical civil sanctions restricting the use of veils and burqas.

            Civil sanctions are commonly used on the continent for all sorts of things.

            And if I have to explain why I posted the muslim, bus driver story in this thread,it strikes me that if brain cells were gun powder you wouldn’t have enough to blow you hat off.

          3. This is getting tedious, you ended a previous comment by saying you don’t care about blogs but you’re taking this very seriously aren’t you? Attacking me because your point has no milage and is merely centred on personal prejudice and anecdotal evidence of no worth.

            You are also inventing an argument here because on the issue of burqa themselves, we agree, in that they are an awful idea but where we separate is that banning items of clothing is daft and not the business of government.

            “What “anecodtal evidence” am I using, any more than you are using anecdotal evidence?”

            Your friend’s story, also, I am not trying to prove a point, you are. Therefore, you need to back it up with evidence, something you’ve failed to do. Hence you turn to personal attacks.

            “Indeed and I comment on them, (but not as much as you, you’re all over the blogosphere like a madwoman’s shit)”

            Am I starting to suspect that you’re my stalker because by saying something like that you are confessing to seeking out further information about me, which is just weird when you say you don’t care.. Also, there is no crime in being a blogger.

            Also, passing judgement on my name is also worthless and ignorant. As is second guessing my life experience and personal background.

            All of this is just bluster, you are going off topic.

            With regard to the poll, the UK has a population of some 60 million, I do not feel that a straw-poll of 1,016 Britons aged 18 and is of great value. Esp. as roughly 700 agreed with the idea

            Or 2,000 for that matter.

            Also, I would argue that people asking to ban an item of clothing are facing a slippery slope towards the banning of other items of clothing, whether religious or not.

            Also, the number of people actually wearing a burqa in the UK is around 40,000 I believe, out of 60 million.

            Your civil sanctions were also not practical and to enforce them would be difficult at best and very costly and to prove what point?

            That we in the UK are scared of face veils?

            I mean, how weak are we that a piece of material has us on the run like this?

            I don’t know about you but I am made of stronger stuff.

            Also, your posting of the Muslim bus driver story was pointless and only goes to make you look like an Islamaphobe. What was the point of that?

            The man was clearly an idiot but being an idiot, as you are proving, is not limited to those of the Islamic faith.

  3. What are the odds he did this because he believed that story about the boy in an England shirt being denied a bus ride, & never read the evidence that it was in fact bollocks?

    That he thought he’d have his revenge on the Muslims for that?

    As for the burqa I still lean against the ban. I am disconcerted that so many left-liberals in European countries support it. But I still hold by my view that a ban won’t actually help anyone.

  4. @ Hoffman-Gil

    “Blah, blah blah three big polls prove nothing burble burble burble poll the entire UK population blah blah blah I am right! *stamps foot, throws toys out of pram* burble burble…..”

    A great bore named Hoffman-Gil
    Took to trolling on blogs for a thrill,
    Certain each post was a sure fire hit,
    But posters repiled “what a crock of shit”
    “This site is going downhill”.

    That’s yer lot on this.

    But as Patrick MacGoohan used to say at the end of each episode of ‘The Prisoner’
    ‘be seeing you’….

    1. Oh dear, you’v lost it. All you have with regards to discussion techniques is to go blah, blah blah, rather than actually engage with me.

      You even feel compelled to actually craft an awful, clumsy poem to me, like an ode to your muse. Which is weird.

      Thanks for stalking me.

  5. Right, although loather to step into this I suppose I have to.

    First of all, don’t play the victim card. There have been all sorts of people welcome on my blog from marxists to racists to liberals to tories, so don’t get all shirty.

    “I am not tolerant to veils and burqas, ergo I probably am a racist, a reactionary and possibly a member of UKIP.”

    No, that makes you intolerant and within the political mainstream. I don’t censure those within the political mainstream for moral failing, I’d have little time for anything else. I simply censure those in the mainstream for bad logic, unworkable policy recommendations and basic misunderstandings of the precepts from which they claim to work.

    For example, “Tolerance is a two-way street.” No, it isn’t, and there’s no logical way to conclude that it is.

    If you are making a deal, i.e. I act this way and you act that way, then you are not tolerating, you are making a deal. Tolerance is only necessary where striking that deal is impossible.

    Moreover, muslims in this country are no more responsible for cultural practises in “muslim countries” than you or I are, barring some official link (i.e. birth, citizenship, kinship).

    That you wouldn’t wear shoes in their houses, etc etc etc is commendable, neither would I, but that is irrelevant to how we should act in this country. One thing that is good about this country is that we are a better country than Saudi Arabia and we don’t ban stuff we don’t like. I don’t want to live in a morally equivalent place because it would be awful.

    Daniel, I’m afraid its a bit of a statistics fail on your part. A survey of 1000 is definitely able to find a statistically significant nationwide trend.

    http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm

    Have a look. Its counter-intuitive but statistics often is.

    The most important things in surveys like that is how questions are worded. For example,

    “Should the burqa been banned in the uk?”

    would get a different response to

    “Should the police be allowed to regulate what you are allowed to wear?”

    Sadly, that doesn’t seem the case in this country and a lot of people are probably in favour of banning the burqa, my mum for one. Obviously I ascribe little weight to the argument ad numerum, just as I don’t eat shit because billions of flies do, there are a lot of authoritarians out there.

    I don’t want to go into everything which captain swing and DHG have covered but I’d rather you kept it civil because I want a nice space for my commenters where we can have a constructive discussion. Anything else off-topic will just get moderated out.

    Asquith, good point, I think you might be on to something there. Perhaps we need to print up the whole of Tabloid Watch and post it though people’s doors.

  6. I hope this story is not the like the one where a woman claimed that she was kicked off a bus by a driver because her son was wearing an England football shirt. The story was later found to be a total fabrication. The journalist was just following the Daily Sport rule of journalism – if someone says something who are we to question it – which leads to stories about buses on the Moon.

    http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.com/2010/06/boy-definitely-not-thrown-off-bus-for.html

    1. Oh indeed, I think that’s what asquith is referring to when he ponders what inspired the driver.

      This could be fabricated, I will watch with interest.

Comments are closed.