“British Prime Minister Boris Johnson refused to apologize for Islamophobic comments he wrote in 2018 comparing Muslim women in burqas to letterboxes and bank robbers.”
Johnson has stood firm on this issue. He was once threatened to be sent by his party to “diversity training” over his face veil comments, and right after he made those comments, he refused to apologize, despite amid charges of “Islamophobia.”.
Johnson still has nothing to apologize for. The face veil is an affront to the freedom of Western societies, in which women have equal rights.
Member of Parliament Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, who renewed demands for the apology, “said he and others who have grown up hearing Islamophobic slurs ‘can appreciate full well the pain felt by already-vulnerable Muslim women when they are described as looking like bank robbers and letterboxes.'” Yet Dhesi does not indicate such concern about the “pain felt by already-vulnerable Muslim women” because of their inferior status under the Sharia, or those women who are beaten for disobedience to their husbands in accordance to Islamic law, or those women who are assaulted and imprisoned for not wearing their coverings, in accordance with the Quran (24:31, 33:59).
“Boris Johnson Refuses To Apologize For Racist Comments On Muslim Women,” by Ja’han Jones, Huffington Post, September 4, 2019:
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson refused to apologize for Islamophobic comments he wrote in 2018 comparing Muslim women in burqas to letterboxes and bank robbers.
Member of Parliament Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi was applauded in the House of Commons Wednesday for demanding an apology from Johnson over an article he wrote for The Daily Telegraph last year. Johnson’s column called a Danish ban on burqas “heavy-handed,” but said it was ridiculous that Muslim women “choose to go around looking like letterboxes” and suggested women wearing burqas look like “bank robbers.”
Johnson, however, refused to apologize, arguing his column actually defended Muslim women’s rights.
Singh Dhesi questioned whether Johnson’s comments befit a member of Parliament, or any public official.
“Mr. Speaker, if I decide to wear a turban, or you decide to wear a cross, or he decides to wear a kippah or a skullcap, or she decides to wear a hijab or a burqa,” Singh Dhesi said, motioning around the room. “Does that mean it is open season for right honorable members of this house to make derogatory and divisive remarks about our appearance?”
Singh Dhesi said he and others who have grown up hearing Islamophobic slurs “can appreciate full well the pain felt by already-vulnerable Muslim women when they are described as looking like bank robbers and letterboxes.” …
mortimer says
Good for Boris. We have to start to stand up for our Western way of life or it will disappear destroyed by Sharia dictatorship.
somehistory says
Well it wasn’t racist and it’s true, so why apologize…which wold be wrong. If one is not sorry for speaking, and one has spoken the truth, then it’s wrong to apologize .
H says
“Mr. Speaker, if I decide to wear a turban, or you decide to wear a cross, or he decides to wear a kippah or a skullcap, or she decides to wear a hijab or a burqa,” Singh Dhesi said, motioning around the room. “Does that mean it is open season for right honorable members of this house to make derogatory and divisive remarks about our appearance?”
The son of a bitch is a liar. In Islam women do not freely choose to wear burkha. They are culturally and mentally conditioned to wear it.
gravenimage says
Worse, Muslim women are often beaten, imprisoned, or murdered if they do not wear it.
CogitoErgoSum says
The wearing of a cross, a turban or a kippah does not require that the face be covered from view. When I was in grade school I was taught by some women who wore garments quite similar to a burka. They also wore a rosary with a large cross attached to it. However, they did not cover their faces. Some people called them nuns and others called them sisters. Although a few people did make fun of them, they seemed to fit into society pretty well. I think that type of clothing could be worn today by members of other religions if it were not for the face being covered. It just seems wrong to require a woman to cover her face and, unless it’s necessary because of some medical condition or physical disfigurement, it also seems rude to those with whom they must interact.
somehistory says
It is important to be able to see a person’s eyes when communicating or just passing someone on the sidewalk. So much a person may try to hide that the eyes reveal mandates this.
And other facial features are important to identification. Frequently in today’s world, encounters turn ugly and even violent. If one cannot describe the other person who may have attacked, accosted, assaulted, this will make it impossible for there to be justice, and that’s difficult enough to get.
gravenimage says
Also, no one is forced to become a nun, whereas in many parts of the Muslim world all women are forced to wear Burqas.
jayell says
Will people just STOP using that stupid ‘islamophobia’ word! It’s a totally nonsensical buzzword cobbled together by some illiterate buffoon who (a) didn’t know what a ‘phobia’ was and (b) was far too ignorant and bigoted to realise that there quite a few billion people around the world who, unlike him, were too intelligent and discerning to be fooled by the transparently contradictory, fraudulent and destructive, antediluvian pseudo-religious scam to which it’s supposed to refer. When Boris Johnson said that burqa-wearing females looked like letter-boxes and bank robbers, it’s simply because burqa-wearing females look like letter-boxes and bank robbers. End of story. Maybe certain people around the world don’t know what a letter-box looks like (probably because they don’t know how to write letters in the first place) and the concept of a ‘bank robber’ has little specific significance in a cultural climate of criminality – in which case anything that Mr. Johnson says about anything that’s vaguely civilised would seem like mumbo-jumbo. It is these ignoramuses that owe Mr. Johnson an apology.
James Lincoln says
jayell,
The term “Islamophobia” was not cobbled together by an illiterate buffoon. It was cleverly crafted by the Muslim brotherhood in order to to shut down legitimate criticism about Islam.
Ironically, they probably used the concept of “homophobia” as a go by, because it is truly irrational to fear homosexuals. On the other hand, however, we all know that it is completely rational to fear Islam.
Their tactics, overall, have been extremely effective.
jayell says
I beg to differ. Misuse of the language is a symptom of the sort of linguistic ignorance that would be associated with questionable standards of literacy or dubious intellectual integrity – or both. It seems that the word ‘islamophobia’ was only coined because these Muslim Brotherhood characters saw the sort of publicity mileage that the suffix ‘phobia’ was getting for the gay community and, in the established tradition of islamic plagiarism, stole the term to market themselves along the lines of their usual ‘victim’ strategy without any regard to its actual meaning. It’s most certainly NOT ‘clever’ because it relies on the presumption that people are going to be too ignorant to realise that it’s a fundamentally inaccurate and ignorant misuse of language. but this presumption has been proved to be misguided by the number of times that this linguistic discrepancy has been picked up around the English-speaking world. The consequence is then going to be that this then rebounds back negatively onto the perpetrators of this crude attempt at linguistic deception, who will then be seen as ignorant or/and unprincipled opportunists whose patent lack of integrity will be assumed to reflect the value of the cause they claim to represent. And this is exactly what has happened. Effectively, they’ve shot themselves in the foot in the long term. ‘Clever’ people tend NOT to do that.
James Lincoln says
jayell,
Much thanks for your detailed reply.
As always, when I am presented with a good argument, I will think this through again…
gravenimage says
Language can be used as a weapon.
Westman says
Free Society: “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.”
Islamic Society: “When in Rome, make the Romans do what YOU do.”
Angemon says
Indeed.
Cicero says
The Sikh MP appears to toe the line within the UK Islamo – Labour Party. Why is he taking up the cudgels on behalf of the advancing Sharia compliant vanguard which proceeds to level all anti – jihad opposition?
Should he not focus on the threats posed to British Sikh girls who are prayed upon by followers of the Religion of Peace ?
The stupidity of this British Sikh MP beggars disbelief
Carolyne says
I was thinking more like black bags of garbage, but yeah, bank robbers and letterboxes says it.
max brenner says
Those demanding he apologize are guilty of treason. This is war. Disseminating propaganda for the enemy in times of war is treason More accuraelty this is deep state sabotage of Western Civilization – still is treason.
gravenimage says
UK: Boris Johnson still refuses to apologize for comparing burqa-wearing women to letter boxes and bank robbers
……………….
Well, this is something. I just wish that Boris Johnson was standing as firm against all the depredations of Islam.
sidney penny says
Why does it take a Sikh Member of British Parliament Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, to do the dirty work for Muslims.
The idea is that if he says what a Muslim should or would say he will look good among the Muslims in Britain.Get their votes etc.
Kashmiri Kaffir says
Just checked that. This worthy is Labour MP from Slough, muslim population 23.29% as per 2011 census (up from 13.35% in 2001). No wonder he is pandering to the followers of peace.
Pete says
yes. slough. Loads of pakistan muslims to appease. it doesn not matter what horrors the muslim put the sikhs through and how the sikhs religion came into being
SAFI says
The Koran says it’s haram for good Muslim men to rape each other’s wives/property. And thus Moe came up with this brilliant invention, the Burqa, which was meant to help the pious muslim believer tell apart the wives of his fellow believers from legitimate rape targets.
Battle says
(Hoping memory serves correctly)
“There is only one god Mohammad, and Allah is his messenger.” –Anjuli Pandavar
eduardo odraude says
Yes, Muhammad tried to use Allah as a personal sock puppet. That may be why Muhammad died in great pain.
eduardo odraude says
Excellent two minute video by David Wood
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ica84DxQhrI
IanB says
Another Sikh carrying water for the Koranistas.
Does he know nothing of Sikh / Muslim history?
eduardo odraude says
Either doesn’t know or doesn’t care. He’s a politician seeking Muslim votes.
OLD GUY says
Johnson has it right! No place in western society.
Brian Hoff says
Well he is now the worst PM in UK history he paint himself into a corner. He might lose than vote of no confidence in partiment.
Bruce Williams says
Worst PM? Please explain yourself Brian.
gravenimage says
Of course “Brian hoff”–really, “Defenderofislam”–considers Boris Johnson to be the worst PM in UK history, since he is not pandering enough to violent invading Muslims enough.
Reziac says
Well, he’s right…
Also, does the man own a comb?
jca reid says
Good ol’ BoJo!! nothing to apologise for. These women have missed a trick. Should have been extras in Monty Python’s “Life of Brian”. A pity we can’t make a “Life of Mohammed.”