Boris Johnson is a liability.

[Bromley boy]

Then you do not believe in the freedom to wear whatever you want.
Would you feel the same about someone choosing to dress like a Power Ranger, or Catwoman?

No I don’t believe people should have the freedom to wear whatever they want.

For instance, I don’t believe members of the National front (or equivalent) should have the right to wear t-shirts with racist slogans. I assume you do?!

The fact you compare a burqa with someone wearing a power ranger or cat woman costume suggests you don’t really appreciate the objections many of us have to what it implies about the wearer: that they are objects to be kept under wraps, only for their misogynistic husbands to see.

Why do you think the same culture doesn't require men to wear burqas?

There’s a Muslim family living on my development. The husband (seems a nice enough bloke, I’ve chatted to him a few times) wears t shirts/shorts/flip flops while his wife is covered from head to foot in black cloth.

That’s not something I consider desirable or acceptable in the U.K. Neither should anyone else who wants to see women treated equally in society.

 

[Bromley boy]

Some people are certainly implying it.

No they aren’t.

We know for a fact that the burqa/has been is mandatory in areas where conservative cultural practices predominate and women are viewed as objects/chattels, and treated appallingly. Some women may choose to wear it, but many are forced to.

The objection many of us have to it is based on concern that is is incompatible with tolerant U.K. cultural practices (which we need robustly enforce, incase we end up losing them). Human beings are social animals, social interaction relies on eye contact and being able to see someone’s face. The burqa denies women this ability and therefore denies them their humanity.

The irony is that if wearing of the burqa was a Christian or Jewish practice, the same people defending it as an object of choice (it’s an object of oppression) would be on here criticising it.

 

[Bromley boy]

The ministerial watchdog:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-breaks-job-rules-column-daily-telegraph-ministers-a8451691.html

Thanks, it would have helped if @bnm had referenced this in the post I replied to.

From a quick read it appears he would have been free to publish after three months, so not the world’s biggest deal. He has probably also calculated that the publicity this has generated for his personal brand will outweigh any censure received.

 

[bramling]

Thanks, it would have helped if @bnm had referenced this in the post I replied to.

From a quick read it appears he would have been free to publish after three months, so not the world’s biggest deal. He has probably also calculated that the publicity this has generated for his personal brand will outweigh any censure received.

What do we all think Boris is actually trying to achieve - if anything apart from attention?

Any leadership ambitions were surely kicked into the long grass at the last leadership contest, and apart from the continuing lack of candidates I don’t see much has really changed since then.

Personally whilst I’m probably somewhere in the same direction as Boris on the political spectrum, I’ve always been a little wary of him. Going back a decade or two when he was editor of the Spectstor I remember a rather ill-thought-out article where he was slagging off the driver of the 165 at Ladbroke Grove which didn’t impress me at the time, and he doesn’t seem to have matured much since. His tenure as mayor didn’t really impress me either, although out of the three on balance I’d rate him the least odious, not that that’s saying much!

 

[Bromley boy]

What do we all think Boris is actually trying to achieve - if anything apart from attention?

Any leadership ambitions were surely kicked into the long grass at the last leadership contest, and apart from the continuing lack of candidates I don’t see much has really changed since then.

That’s a good question - perhaps it’s a symptom of an enormous, fragile, ego? Or a festering resentment at how his own leadership ambitions failed, based on how the successful candidate has foundered? It seems he’s hoping for another crack of the whip.

The Tories desperately need new blood. Sajid Javid seems the best of the current crop but seems to be biding his time for now.

Personally whilst I’m probably somewhere in the same direction as Boris on the political spectrum, I’ve always been a little wary of him. Going back a decade or two when he was editor of the Spectstor I remember a rather ill-thought-out article where he was slagging off the driver of the 165 at Ladbroke Grove which didn’t impress me at the time, and he doesn’t seem to have matured much since. His tenure as mayor didn’t really impress me either, although out of the three on balance I’d rate him the least odious, not that that’s saying much!

Indeed. And what a b*ggers muddle of a choice! “Least odious” is an apt description indeed.

The first was an ageing, hard left, anti-Semite, who ultimately proved too embarrassing even for Corbyn, albeit cut from the same cloth. It seems he has finally been put out to pasture at last.

The incumbent is an empty suit who seems to have achieved nothing of note (other than, on his watch, the London murder rate mushrooming to rival New York’s). He resembles a pull-string mama doll with only two phrases played on loop whenever there’s a camera on him: “it’s all down to the Tory cuts”; “my dad was a bus driver”.

I honestly despair at the state of U.K. politics.

 

[Geezertronic]

I thought you're supposed to remove all garments that obstruct your face when doing a passport/ID photo?

The security men and women at the company I worked for at the time (this was back in 2001) felt uneasy in asking the women to show their face for an ID card photo for fear of being accused of being racist, sexist, <<insert word in here>>, and I believe there was also an assumption that the women were not expected to wear an ID card in full view (as per company policy) that displayed their face for the same reason. This was the first and only time I have seen anything like this in my long working career.

 

[bnm]

Thanks, it would have helped if @bnm had referenced this in the post I replied to.

It's really not my job to help others that don't have a full rounded understanding of the topic under debate.

 

[Bromley boy]

It's really not my job to help others that don't have a full rounded understanding of the topic under debate.

I assure you I understand the topic under debate, fully in the round.

Re. your first point, agreed! It’s not your job.

So it’s of no consequence that the worth of your contributions to these threads equals precisely what you’re being paid for them (ie nadda, zilch, diddly-squat).

But it would be nice if you would do us all the courtesy of referencing your sources in future .

 

[bnm]

Ahh, all, well and good, but you jumped in with a passive aggressive "Says who? You?" response, without stopping to think that I may have known what I was talking about. A politer response with a request for a source, and no follow up suggesting I was being unhelpful, may well have elicited more positive responses from me when I returned to this thread. Play nicely and be patient, rather than go on the attack.

Now, that ministerial code. I think it unlikely Boris will face any censure from the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACoBA). It's a largely toothless organisation - as are most bodies that attempt to rein in the excesses of the political class. The more narcissistic of said class - and Boris is right up there in believing in his own self-importance - just carry on regardless.

ACoBA is supposed to be an important democratic check that is meant to prevent self-serving politicians from using their time in office as a means of securing pecuniary advantage immediately after resigning, being sacked, or being booted out by the electorate. Sadly ACoBA is a supine rubber stamping exercise. In the past 18 months, not a single post-ministerial job (and there have been plenty of ministers who've lost their roles) has been prevented from going ahead.

Ex- ministers who remain MPs should not, in my opinion, be allowed to have jobs or appointments outside the House of Commons. Particularly politically charged jobs such as a newspaper columnist. That should be enshrined in law. Not merely a 'code' drawn up by MPs themselves.

Boris is nowhere near the worst at gaining financially so soon after leaving high office. That accolade goes to another self-serving tory. George Osborne started coining it in in the financial sector immediately after his sacking as Chancellor of the Exchequer. He managed to earn nearly ten times his MP salary with speaking engagements to the financial sector (of course his time as chief cashier of UK plc was of no relevance to those jobs ). All whilst still supposedly devoting time to his job as MP for Taton. So Boris is a long way yet from being the worst pig troughing sitting MP. Give him time though...

 

[EM2]

No I don’t believe people should have the freedom to wear whatever they want.

For instance, I don’t believe members of the National front (or equivalent) should have the right to wear t-shirts with racist slogans. I assume you do?!

I refer you to post #81, which you later quoted, so I assume that you did actually read it.

The fact you compare a burqa with someone wearing a power ranger or cat woman costume suggests you don’t really appreciate the objections many of us have to what it implies about the wearer: that they are objects to be kept under wraps, only for their misogynistic husbands to see.

Almost everyone had said their objection is because they prevent communication. You cannot liberate someone and their choices by forcing them to make different choices. That just a different sort of oppression.

Why do you think the same culture doesn't require men to wear burqas?

It requires men to dress modestly.

There’s a Muslim family living on my development. The husband (seems a nice enough bloke, I’ve chatted to him a few times) wears t shirts/shorts/flip flops while his wife is covered from head to foot in black cloth.

If she is wearing that through personal choice, that's her right to do so.
If it's at his insistence, he's an emotionally controlling, coercive man and a hypocrite.
Have you chatted to her? Asked her why she wears a niqab?

 

[EM2]

The objection many of us have to it is based on concern that is is incompatible with tolerant U.K. cultural practices (which we need robustly enforce, incase we end up losing them). Human beings are social animals, social interaction relies on eye contact and being able to see someone’s face. The burqa denies women this ability and therefore denies them their humanity.

Hang on, I thought you objected to it because of 'what it implies about the wearer:
that they are objects to be kept under wraps, only for their misogynistic husbands to see.'?

 

[Bromley boy]

I refer you to post #81, which you later quoted, so I assume that you did actually read it.

But in that post it was you who said people should be free to wear whatever they want. I never agreed with you.

I’ll ask you again, would you consider it acceptable for NF members to wear tee-shirts with a “p*kis out” slogan?

If not, you have acknowledged that freedom to choose clothing should be restricted in some circumstances.

Almost everyone had said their objection is because they prevent communication. You cannot liberate someone and their choices by forcing them to make different choices. That just a different sort of oppression.

So you have finally (in a roundabout way) admitted that these women may be oppressed. Some might be choosing it, some might not. So why allow the (potential) instrument of oppression in the first place?

It requires men to dress modestly.

That particular culture also allows men to have many wives, requires that homosexuals be executed etc. Why are you in favour of any aspect of it existing in the U.K.?

Are you honestly not able to acknowledge that the culture of Wahhabism/sailfism treats women like dirt?

If she is wearing that through personal choice, that's her right to do so.
If it's at his insistence, he's an emotionally controlling, coercive man and a hypocrite.
Have you chatted to her? Asked her why she wears a niqab?

Nope - chatted to him about his rather tasty BMW M6 a few times (he’s a car guy). Funnily enough I’ve hardly seen her - she never leaves the flat without him and their child, and he’s the one doing the talking when she does.

 

[Bromley boy]

Hang on, I thought you objected to it because of 'what it implies about the wearer:
that they are objects to be kept under wraps, only for their misogynistic husbands to see.'?

Oh strewth .

Has it occurred to you that I might have more than one objection to it?!

 

[EM2]

But in that post it was you who said people should be free to wear whatever they want. I never agreed with you.

I’ll ask you again, would you consider it acceptable for NF members to wear tee-shirts with a “p*kis out” slogan?

Read that post again, and pay special attention to the sentence that begins 'Caveat'.
The rest I'll discuss later.

 

[EM2]

Oh strewth .

Has it occurred to you that I might have more than one objection to it?!

So why not say 'an objection' or 'one of the objections' than 'the objection'?
For someone with a degree in law, I'd have thought being strictly accurate and precise would be important.

 

[Bromley boy]

Read that post again, and pay special attention to the sentence that begins 'Caveat'.
The rest I'll discuss later.

Ok, to address that caveat, I (and every woman I’ve ever interacted with, including several Muslim women) find it offensive and distressing when women are denied their humanity and dressed in black robes from head to toe. So maybe it should be banned on that basis?!

If you’re in favour of women being empowered and treated equally to men, you really shouldn’t be in favour of the burqa... presumably you’re not in favour of the other repressive, deeply misogynistic practices which come from the same culture? Or are you?

Trust me on this - ask your wife why she doesn’t wear one...

 

[Bromley boy]

Ahh, all, well and good, but you jumped in with a passive aggressive "Says who? You?" response, without stopping to think that I may have known what I was talking about. A politer response with a request for a source, and no follow up suggesting I was being unhelpful, may well have elicited more positive responses from me when I returned to this thread. Play nicely and be patient, rather than go on the attack.

If you’re making an assertion, please back it up, is all I’m saying.

It's a largely toothless organisation - as are most bodies that attempt to rein in the excesses of the political class. The more narcissistic of said class -

Agreed. Luckily you and I both voted leave, to curb the excesses of the arrogant (European) political class.

Boris is nowhere near the worst at gaining financially so soon after leaving high office. That accolade goes to another self-serving tory. George Osborne started coining it in in the financial sector immediately after his sacking as Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Surely the ultimate accolade for snout-in-trough-post-political-self-enrichment goes to the deeply odious, schmoozer in chief, Tony Blair?

 

[Bromley boy]

So why not say 'an objection' or 'one of the objections' than 'the objection'?
For someone with a degree in law, I'd have thought being strictly accurate and precise would be important.

Touche. Perhaps I could have been clearer.

Then again I’m no longer being charged out at £650 (+VAT) per hour to churn out tax opinions, so don’t expect too much gold plating.

What I write on here is worth precisely what you’ve paid for it .

 

[EM2]

Ok, to address that caveat, I (and every woman I’ve ever interacted with, including several Muslim women) find it offensive and distressing when women are denied their humanity and dressed in black robes from head to toe. So maybe it should be banned on that basis?!

Is it worn to *cause* you offence or distress?

 

[bnm]

If you’re making an assertion, please back it up, is all I’m saying.

Then say it nicely. Don't presume.

Surely the ultimate accolade for snout-in-trough-post-political-self-enrichment goes to the deeply odious, schmoozer in chief, Tony Blair?

None of his self-enrichment after leaving office was attained whilst sitting as an MP. He took the Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds on the same day as he stood down as Prime Minster. He then became Middle East Envoy for the European Union and United Nations. A full six months passed before he took up a non-political paid position with JPMorgan Chase. There was never any suggestion at the time that he failed to adhere to any ministerial codes after leaving office.

Unlike Boris and Gideon he was never troughing whilst sitting as an MP. That's what I take issue with. Far too many politicians today, the majority of whom are of the blue hue, see being an MP as a part time job that gives them access to other lucrative employment. Far too few see being an MP as a servant to their constituents.

 

[Groningen]

Boris Johnson has yet said no negative things about the Netherlands. Lets keep it that way.

 

[mmh]

Boris Johnson has yet said no negative things about the Netherlands. Lets keep it that way.

Sorry! https://nltimes.nl/2014/11/12/london-mayor-calls-amsterdam-sleazy

The tolerant drug policy in the Netherlands has made much of Amsterdam's city center "sleazy," according to London Mayor Boris Johnson. He stated that the progressive approach in countries like the Netherlands and Portugal are "outdated" during a People's Question Time meeting Tuesday in Waltham Forest, London.

 

[Groningen]

OK; 4 years ago. We have a new mayor and she promised to clean up the mess. Mainly caused by persons from Britain. An Ombudsman says that Amterdam has fallen in an urban Jungle in the midnight hours. At least we do not have that many knive attacks of people between 10 and 20 years of age. Yes; there is still a drugwar going on in (mainly) Amsterdam.

 

[bramling]

That’s a good question - perhaps it’s a symptom of an enormous, fragile, ego? Or a festering resentment at how his own leadership ambitions failed, based on how the successful candidate has foundered? It seems he’s hoping for another crack of the whip.

I have a feeling you're probably spot-on with this. I suspect another crack of the whip would probably have the same result, if not straight away but further down the line - unless there simply isn't anyone else regarded as credible. From a purely personal point of view I'd actually be not unhappy with Rees-Mogg, but I wouldn't go so far as to say I would choose him if I were the party.

The Tories desperately need new blood. Sajid Javid seems the best of the current crop but seems to be biding his time for now.

I wonder if Javid is experienced enough, although to be fair in some ways that could be a positive point - he's certainly not associated with all the crap that's been going on. Labour are in the same position - and with the added problem that any names which could be potentially credible to the country are unlikely to be credible to the party in its current state.

Indeed. And what a b*ggers muddle of a choice! “Least odious” is an apt description indeed.

The first was an ageing, hard left, anti-Semite, who ultimately proved too embarrassing even for Corbyn, albeit cut from the same cloth. It seems he has finally been put out to pasture at last.

The incumbent is an empty suit who seems to have achieved nothing of note (other than, on his watch, the London murder rate mushrooming to rival New York’s). He resembles a pull-string mama doll with only two phrases played on loop whenever there’s a camera on him: “it’s all down to the Tory cuts”; “my dad was a bus driver”.

And the rest - add in the disgusting comments about terrorism being part & parcel of living in a modern city, being a national embarrassment in front of the US president, and trashing TFL's finances thanks to the fares freeze... I also hate the way TFL publicity now seems to be an open political campaign for Khan - posters which start "The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has ....".

Don't get me started on the Mayor of London role - another Blair creation which was expected at the time to be a shoe-in for Labour. I absolutely resent the London/outside London divisiveness this has created.

I honestly despair at the state of U.K. politics.

Agreed, things are very depressing at present. Perhaps the legacy of a decade of New Labour spin, lies, overpromises, shafting the future for the electoral wins of the present ??

 

[najaB]

There’s a Muslim family living on my development. The husband (seems a nice enough bloke, I’ve chatted to him a few times) wears t shirts/shorts/flip flops while his wife is covered from head to foot in black cloth.

That’s not something I consider desirable or acceptable in the U.K. Neither should anyone else who wants to see women treated equally in society.

Do you know - for a fact - that he makes her wear it? It might be justification, but I have spoken with Muslim women who say that they actually like wearing a niqab since there's no pressure to be fashionable and they can wear whatever they like underneath it.

 

[furnessvale]

Do you know - for a fact - that he makes her wear it? It might be justification, but I have spoken with Muslim women who say that they actually like wearing a niqab since there's no pressure to be fashionable and they can wear whatever they like underneath it.

So not really religious conviction in those cases?

 

[Geezertronic]

Do you know - for a fact - that he makes her wear it? It might be justification, but I have spoken with Muslim women who say that they actually like wearing a niqab since there's no pressure to be fashionable and they can wear whatever they like underneath it.

But a person can still be under no pressure wearing a Hijab so does not have to suppress their face from view

 

[bnm]

*mic drop*

 

[bnm]

The first was an ageing, hard left, anti-Semite,

Jew watch. Day 92.

Another irrelevant shoehorning in of your favourite bête noire.

Please start that thread. Beyond tiresome now.

 

[Busaholic]

Daily Telegraph headline in tomorrow's edition : 'May sets up show trial for Johnson'. Oh what fun! May I have a front seat, and will rotten tomatoes be available?