tinyurl.com/6my52p5
For those who don't care to read the whole thing, a white British man, at Gatwick security made a remark about a person of a certain religion going thru security with her face covered. Given loads of grief and hassle, being racist etc. This despite the fact that being a Muslim is a religion not a race.
Yet another one of a long list of reasons not to fly if it can be avoided!
|
|
Presumably the same exemption applies equally to nuns, and perhaps formally grieving widows, and elephant men?
|
>> Presumably the same exemption applies equally to nuns, and perhaps formally grieving widows, and elephant
>> men?
What exemption?
"However, all passengers must show their faces to UK Borders officials when they pass through passport control. Muslim women who wear hijabs can request that their identity is checked by a female immigration officer and they can also ask that they be taken to a private room before they remove their head wear. "
|
|
I've done discrimination awareness training. I believe he may have grounds for complaint on the basis of indirect discrimination.
|
The remark was clearly innocuous and the response wholly inappropriate.
Having said that, it seems to me airports are not the sort of places to make any remark at all.
It's the same when I visit prisons.
Best bet with the guards there is to be compliant and say only what you have to.
|
As far as I can tell this happened at the bag etc search. The passenger in the hijab had either already satisfied id requirements or had to do so 'down the line'.
I rarely fly but I'm prety sure last time I did the security at Birmingham included a fairly explicit warning about provocative remarks, jokes etc. In fact my kids nearly came to grief 'cos they were sniping at each other in the queue.
IMO the guy was daft to try an make that sort of remark. Pulled up for it he could have apologised but it rather reads that instead he took the old soldier line.
At least he caught his flight. Part of me says it might have been handled better but another part says he was lucky not to have ended up in the cells having his orifices explored.
|
I tend to agree with Brompton and Iffy, bloke should have known better.
Keep gob shut, the days of free speech are over for ever, once they've sussed out thought control that will be next.
Country isn't any better for it mind, nor any of its inhabitants or travellers.
As for air travel, very unlikely we shall do so again.
We cannot stand being herded like sheep and assumed to be terrorist or undesirable because thats their default setting, they can poke their airports and attitudes where sun no longer visits.
|
>> I tend to agree with Brompton and Iffy, bloke should have known better.
>>
>> Keep gob shut, the days of free speech are over for ever, once they've sussed
>> out thought control that will be next.
Maybe sooner than you think....
preview.tinyurl.com/2w6tm2h (links to Torygraph)
|
>> Maybe sooner than you think....
>> preview.tinyurl.com/2w6tm2h (links to Torygraph)
Thought police will be having trouble sleeping with the excitement.
Please stop the world i want to get off....glad i'm not 50 years younger.
|
>> Maybe sooner than you think....
>> preview.tinyurl.com/2w6tm2h (links to Torygraph)
>>
I'm doomed when this comes in.
|
Leaving aside the race angle, the guy picked the worst two topics to make idle chat about at an airport - other passengers and security.
He would have got away with something like: "I'm looking forward to getting back to the warmer weather," or: "I see Harlequins' blind side flanker played a corker on Saturday."
Still better to say nothing.
|
>>They can poke their airports and attitudes where sun no longer visits.
>>
Oh! Brother....................Good to hear from you again. x
|
>>............but another part says he was lucky not to have ended up in the cells having his orifices explored.
Reading between the lines, I think he may have done - twice.
''With his flight departure time now fast approaching Mr Jones agreed to the compromise. Escorted by the police officer, he was taken through security where he was again subjected to a full search after his hip replacement set off the metal detector alarms. ''
|
"We were then joined by a second female security guard who stated that she was Muslim and was deeply distressed by my comment."
Really? For goodness sake.
|
>> ''With his flight departure time now fast approaching Mr Jones agreed to the compromise. Escorted
>> by the police officer, he was taken through security where he was again subjected to
>> a full search after his hip replacement set off the metal detector alarms. ''
I took full search to mean being the 'pat down' frisking which is usually required when there's an unresolved detect on the metal scanner.
Never happened to me but Miss B was taken on one side for that reason boarding the Eurostar - the culprit was an underwired undergarment!!
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 27 Feb 12 at 09:57
|
...Never happened to me but Miss B was taken on one side for that reason boarding the Eurostar - the culprit was an underwired undergarment!!...
Isn't she a bit young to be already fighting gravity?
|
Apologise to whom and for what? He didn't make a statement - he asked a question. Relevant and needing an answer. I was stopped the other day and asked how much money I was taking abroad and where I had obtained it. MYOB!
One has to wonder if the second (Muslim) guard heard the question or was told about it and then got offended?
Last edited by: Meldrew on Mon 27 Feb 12 at 09:59
|
Since when has it been the business of airport security guards to lecture individuals on the appropriateness or not of their conversation(s) if it has no relevance to security etc?
Why would they think it appropriate to dig out a muslim member of staff who up until then was oblivious, so that she could then be offended? What a damned cheek.
Why would airport security think it appropriate to tell a man to apologise for a remark or not be let through security (and then fly)?
What a gross abuse of privilege.
I sincerely hope this man sues and publicises widely his apology...in the hope that the rest of us might be treated a little better.
It matters not whether any of us agree with the statement the man made, he lives in a country of so called free speech and should be able to make it as long as it is not grossly offensive...which it wasn't.
|
Common sense prevails in the posts from Meldrew and WP thankfully.
Surely we should be able to question whether the security of our own country is being looked after properly or not.
In this case, and on many other 'religious grounds' I fear it's not.
Pat
|
I largely agree with WP's post, but I'm surprised he made it.
Not many coppers - when dealing with a customer - like that customer to question how the copper does his job in relation to others.
The guy at the airport made a fair point, but at the wrong time and in the wrong place.
|
>> Not many coppers - when dealing with a customer - like that customer to question
>> how the copper does his job in relation to others.
You are right....but the individual should not be asllowed to abuse their position and trust to put down the 'awkward' party.
>> The guy at the airport made a fair point, but at the wrong time and
>> in the wrong place.
Why was it the wrong place? Because we've all become sheep and now accept over bearing conduct from security gurards at airports?
|
I have a suggestion. If UK border crossings by individuals are recorded ( which one assumes they are ) could they not take a slightly more relaxed view of people who have left and re-entered the country many times a year for most of their adult lives and have yet to have ever been found with fireworks in their shoes and who have never so far been found to be smuggling drugs and have certainly never up until now even so much as attempted to hijack an aeroplane? Like a an NCB for frequent flyers !
Or is that too simple?
Last edited by: Humph D'Bout on Mon 27 Feb 12 at 14:51
|
>> I have a suggestion. If UK border crossings by individuals are recorded ( which one
>> assumes they are ) could they not take a slightly more relaxed view of people
>> who have left and re-entered the country many times a year for most of their
>> adult lives and have yet to have ever been found with fireworks in their shoes
>> and who have never so far been found to be smuggling drugs and have certainly
>> never up until now even so much as attempted to hijack an aeroplane? Like a
>> an NCB for frequent flyers !
>>
>> Or is that too simple?
This is pretty much how the Israelis approach it, and they are no mugs at stopping people blowing up their planes.
I think I might have posted this before, but we took two paper cups of boiling coffee and a pair of scissors (which we owned up to when my wife realised she had them) through security at Ben Gurion airport. Try that at Luton!
I thanked the guard who gave me the explanation that they are far more interested in who is getting on the plane than what they have on them - within reason presumably.
|
|
True enough Manatee. Until about three years ago I was a fairly regular traveller to Israel due to a business connection and come to think of it you're right. they were reasonably enough quite interested in why I was going there but once I explained that I was there to buy Israeli produced products they couldn't have been more courteous. Unlike the the charm school drop-outs at the borders of the country I was born in. The only ruder ones I've ever encountered are at JFK where they have derision and humiliation down to a fine art.
Last edited by: Humph D'Bout on Mon 27 Feb 12 at 21:10
|
|
If some thing is wrong there is no wrong time or place to raise it, except perhaps, when under the heel of power crazed, no discretion, don't know or understand the rules, government funded aparatchiks. Never forget we are paying thru the nose for this boorish incompetence!
|
|
I wonder if the 'security' were getting a little worried? If the guy didn't board the aircraft, wouldn't his luggage have to be found and offloaded with all the implications that would cause, delayed departure, missed 'slot', penalties, etc?
|
It probably would have caused delays and disruption but none of this matters when one has a problem with someone in one's Empire asking reasonable questions about what is going on.
I am sure there is scope here for saying one is being discriminated against if dealt with by someone not of one's own faith/colour/nationality. We know that people of a certain faith and wearing face masks have the right to a private interview with someone of that faith. Let's hear it for the Christians!
Planning ahead - watch out for some headline about "Meldrew clone arrested in Gatwick security for asking reasonable questions that no-one would answer" Some time before lunch on Friday May 18th should do it
|
>>watch out for some headline about "Meldrew clone arrested in Gatwick security for asking reasonable questions that no-one would answer" <<
Will you take me with you Meldrew?
I'll be standing right by your side asking those questions too!
Pat
|
Meldrew and Pat, all very well taking the system on and you are right in principle.
However most people not retired or semi retired would be most unwise to raise their heads above the parapets concerning such subjects if they were considering applying for certain jobs etc in the future.
As members or ex of certain political parties have found out to their cost, it doesn't pay to be even suspected of having the wrong thoughts or associated with those who do, PC tentacles are long.
The lunacy and PC of the last 15 years especially has seen good honest people having to keep quiet to ensure their very careers and livelihoods do not suddenly take a very sharp turn for the worse.
Its very wrong but realistic, be careful.
|
Bit of paranoia there GB, if more people 'took the system on' we wouldn't have to be so critical of the world in which we live, would we?
I'd be happy anytime to stand up for British people to be treated equally with foreignors, whatever part of the world they came from.
It's one thing that is fundamentally wrong with this country's outlook, we have to welcome, and not offend anyone who comes here...no matter how much it puts our own security at risk.
Pat
|
Maybe you're right and it is paranoia.
See i have a big problem with peoples attitudes to Muslims in particular, i have met many and have found them on the whole to be polite decent respectful and respectable people, they have their customs and culture differences to us, so what? they treat me with respect in 99% of cases and i do the same to them.
I also struggle to find any normal Muslim that takes offence as easily as we are led to believe, though not hard to find some half wit wet lefty white person to take offence for them and proceed to stir the carp up when there wasn't a problem in the first place, especially if they can make a career out of it...hence idiotic references to Christmas and the like, most right minded Muslims think we are bonkers making such a song and dance over things like this, they are right.
I don't think people of other cultures are the problem in this country, its the PC brigade ensuring there is a problem who are the problem.
In my job i go to many small factories etc often staffed exclusively by ethnic minorities, almost without fail i am welcomed in a friendly decent manner, my hand is shook and after my work is done i am seen off with another handshake and cheeful manner, maybe because i treat them in a decent polite respectful way too helps....if only similar urban premises staffed by white Brits were so pleasant to visit, where anything above a grunt is serious communication.
|
>> its the PC brigade ensuring there is a problem who are the problem. >>
In the other similar thread,
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=9765&m=217895&v=e
two of the people taking offence were:
Vanessa Harvey-Samuel, head of localities and learning at Hull City Council, and Abel Rivera, chief officer of Humber All Nations Alliance.
The latter is a charity, as quoted in the 4liberty links and funded as follows:
"HUMBER ALL NATIONS ALLIANCE LIMITED
The accounts have the kind of donors you would expect.
Several which stand out are:
Hull Primary Care Trust (i.e. the NHS) £175,677
City Health Care Partnership project £21,750
Humber NHS Trust £7,850
East Riding Migrant Impact Fund £11,834 (in which East Riding Council admit that migrants have an impact such that charitiable funding has to be done.)"
Last edited by: John H on Mon 27 Feb 12 at 18:05
|
I don't think the dichotomy here is British / foreign, Pat; it's what happens when you allow religion and related matters out of the private domain where they belong, and into the sphere of public policy. We have - and should have - the right to be free of mistreatment or discrimination for the religious beliefs we hold or, importantly, don't hold; but we do not have the right to be shielded from other people's comments or opinions on those beliefs.
In other words, what the passenger in the story said here was, arguably, crass and insensitive, but that should have been the end of the matter. He was also wrong about the security rules, which only require the removal of outer garments like coats and jackets; a veil would not impede the security scanning, which is only a check for metal on the person.
So both sides here got it wrong. And both should have known better: as Iffy says, such places are best treated as humour-free zones. Just keep quiet, do as you're told and you'll have more time in the airside restaurant to tackle that steak with the tiny knife they give you.
|
Let me make something clear, I don't have one scrap of dislike of any forein person, coming from very close to leicester and having made many good friends there I absolutely agree with GB.
What I find hard to accept is that so often we, as British people are discriminated against, in our own country in an effort to avoid the rights of those who are visiting or choose to live here.
There needs to be a balance before we lose our rights, our roots and are turned agains any non British because of this attitude.
Pat
|
|
Two centre, 3 days in Venice and 4 in Sorrento, if we get thru security.
|
>> As members or ex of certain political parties have found out to their cost, it doesn't pay to be even suspected of having the wrong thoughts or associated with those who do, PC tentacles are long.
Do you mean fascist, racist or xenophobic political parties GB? Why so coy? I doubt if members or ex-members of the Monster Raving Loonies are often suspected of having the wrong thoughts.
|
>> Do you mean fascist, racist or xenophobic political parties GB?
I rest my case, thanks AC for confirming.
|
>> thanks AC for confirming.
You've lost me I'm afraid. Confirming what exactly? And you haven't answered my question.
|
Confirming what exactly?
The hysterical finger pointing yah boo reaction to parties not of the current single party with three names sytem we currently have.
Some xenephobic as you put it people have for years had no political representation in this country, not all of us want for example to be members of the EU masterstate, those of us who feel like this end up voting for parties other than the main three.
Invariably those parties are despised and ridiculed, often rightly often wrongly, by those who think our country should be controlled by others, but the objection doesn;t stop at argi=uing against it becomes dirty and sininster when people are persecuted from their jobs because they fail to confirm to the current trend.
Who are the true fascists, those who would argue for something they believe in, or those who would use every means possible to destroy them, and to deny them a voice.
I know many people who vote for and support parties other than the main three, i don't find evil racists i find genuine decent people who have no representation in our land, despite the fact they are all hard working contributors to the system and pay for it all.
Your post with its street protest words was the perfect example of the usual reaction.
|
>> I know many people who vote for and support parties other than the main three, i don't find evil racists i find genuine decent people who have no representation in our land, despite the fact they are all hard working contributors to the system and pay for it all.
Genuine decent chaps perhaps, but why do they think they have no representation? The country has been rendered and kept free enough for them to be able to vote for tinpot parties if they want to, and kept that way by the far-from-perfect (one can only agree) elected representatives of the mainstream parties.
Perhaps the problem is these parties themselves, with their muffled and coded doubletalk, rather than the innocent folk who vote for them (of course some are less innocent). They aren't a real threat in this country, where you don't have to be pc or a Guardianista to have your teeth set on edge by the likes of Nick Griffin. But elsewhere these forms of extreme-nationalist right populism are causing trouble and suffering. Perhaps it's an age thing and some have forgotten or never learned - not you obviously - that we've been through all that carp in Western Europe already. There's a slippery slope.
|
Dutchie very sensibly reminds us that fringe parties do get a couple of MPs in countries with proportional voting systems, and that proportional voting was rejected by the British in a referendum.
Of course the two main parties and most of the press campaigned for the existing 'first-past-the-post' system, and the voters went along with them. I think the reason may have been the spectacle of drifting European government in the fifties and since, when those countries were being governed by unstable coalitions, as some still are.
You are right gb to suspect that the system we have favours and comforts the big parties, and puts us in a position where we have to hope they don't get really uppity and start to take advantage.
Many suspect that they do take advantage, and not just the voters for far-right parties or the absurdly-named UKIP. But we need something to worry about.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Tue 28 Feb 12 at 16:36
|
>> the current single party with three names sytem we currently have. >>
gb:
1. What is the ideal system that you are in favour of?
2. Is there anywhere in the world that comes close to your ideal?:
a. voting/election system
b. party (that gets to stand even if it fails to get elected).
|
The only fair system is Proponsional Representation which was dejected by the British Public.
Geert Wilders who has a minority movement in the Netherlands has a vote in parliment.
I'm not keen on Wilders but he is allowed his say.This movement started with Pim Fortuin.
|
>> 1. What is the ideal system that you are in favour of?
>>
PR, with all its faults, its the only truly democratic way, *still open to corruption by placing the correct appratchiks in the correct jobs to suit the party*, but i believe a system that would involve the people of the country more, for their vote would count where now it matters little.
Would help prevent tactical voting which distorts results and ensures the best of the worse get in.
We didn't have a referendum on PR so it was never rejected, we had an alternative system that wasn't PR in any shape or form.
As with the refereundum for the common market, half truths and misleading propaganda by various vested interests helped the vote to go the way the three main parties wanted it.
The main parties will not allow PR under any circumstances imo....no actually i'm wrong the two main won't allow it but the libs have lost their integrity and are a lost cause for many years to come.
**no worse than the parachuting in of chosen golden candidates to suit certain agendas and tick boxes
Last edited by: gordonbennet on Tue 28 Feb 12 at 17:20
|
>> The main parties will not allow PR under any circumstances imo....
If they do and you are still alive gb you will almost certainly say it's the wrong sort of PR. I don't think PR will do for you. What you want is a revolution of some sort.
|
|
!!!!
Last edited by: Meldrew on Mon 27 Feb 12 at 18:20
|
Gondola...here I come;)
Pat
|
|
PDA = Playing Dangerously Away?
|
Bloke was a prat!
But on what grounds do the security people have to detain you? They are not police officers or customs officials are they?
Of course they can call the police and deny access to an aircraft but do they have any other powers?
|
The man was slightly naive - though of course the guards were absolutely wrong, either because they are on a power trip or more likely they are terrified of doing the wrong thing - everybody knows you keep your opinions to yourself at security unless you like having your bags searched or experiences involving rubber gloves.
The tragic thing is that this kind of carp is entirely self serving - it brings anti-racism into disrepute and foments more disharmony, making things worse not better.
Last edited by: Manatee on Mon 27 Feb 12 at 20:26
|
How did this story get in the press? (today's Mail covers it as well).
I can only surmise that David Jones or someone acting on his behalf supplied it. We only have his account. The airport staff, acting in professional capacities, are not allowed to tell their side themselves. And the days when managers would publicly and firmly back their staff went years ago.
Maybe he did just ask an innocent question, but if he had a real concern he'd have been better asking for a manager. On another interpretation we all know somebody who can start a fight in an empty room and then escalate it some yet claim utter innocence when challenged (my mother for one!!).
Like GB I work with Muslims every day. Most of them were born here; they no more choose the UK as home than I do. My usual desk has me working opposite a lady of that faith. She buzzes off and prays during the lunchbreak and fasts at Ramadan but otherwise her life seems pretty much like mine - checking up on her sons' after school peregrinations and getting them to focus on homework etc!!
|
>> somebody who can start a fight in an empty room and then escalate it some yet claim utter innocence when challenged <<
Most of them wear uniforms with Security written on it somewhere!
Pat
|
>> Story now picked up by BBC.
I think the BBC is where it started - he was interviewed by John Humphrys on the Today program yesterday morning
|
|
I`ve often wondered how you would stand in Law, if you had a "Genuine Phobia" of Non-White Peoples, on the same standing as Aggrophobics or Hydrophobics etc. would you still be classed as "Racist"?
|
|
No but you might be "Sectioned"!
|
Even More PC Nonsense - Cliff Pope
