Article

2006-10-26 Britain

Britis Airlines: fury as it allows Muslim veil, forbids cross

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by lotp 2006-10-26 07:57|| || Front Page|| [11140 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Wow - a PC on PC battle brewing... This could actually achieve change if it festers long enough to escalate.

Posted by .com 2006-10-26 09:41|| 2006-10-26 09:41|| Front Page Top

#2 Perhaps she can ask if she could wear a star-and-crescent instead....

BA would either have to prove itself a hypercrite or piss of their muslim overlords....

Posted by CrazyFool 2006-10-26 10:56|| 2006-10-26 10:56|| Front Page Top

#3 Stand your ground Ms. Eweida. Just adding one more stick to the fire on the veil showdown.

Posted by SpecOp35 2006-10-26 11:33|| 2006-10-26 11:33|| Front Page Top

#4 Sorry but I'm on the side of BA on this one.

Yes it stinks, yes it's PC, yes it favours one side over all the others, but this is a business afterall, and it's the airline industry no less. BA's job is to fly as many people as possible. If they want to keep the planes full then they should do whatever it takes.

Otherwise Ms. Nadia could be looking for another line of work altogether. If she wants to stand her ground then let her do so in another industry.

Posted by Contrarian 2006-10-26 12:38|| 2006-10-26 12:38|| Front Page Top

#5 Just stomp the piss outta everyone equally. I'm down wid dat.

Posted by .com 2006-10-26 12:41|| 2006-10-26 12:41|| Front Page Top

#6 Disagree.

Commercial airline industry is not open to easy competition. Landing rights are limited and controlled by the government. BA originally had government ownership IIRC and in any case is heavily entwined with government regulations.

If this were a truly competitive market with few barriers to entry, I'd agree. But given the status of the industry I'm with Eweida. YMMV of course.

Posted by lotp 2006-10-26 12:41|| 2006-10-26 12:41|| Front Page Top

#7 If they want to keep the planes full then they should do whatever it takes.

You mean like "more Arabs fly with BA, so no Jews allowed"?

Posted by ed 2006-10-26 12:44|| 2006-10-26 12:44|| Front Page Top

#8 She's taking the wrong tatic. The rule forbids jewelery. She needs to get one of those flying nun hats - the pointy one - and demand she be allowed to wear it.

Posted by anon 2006-10-26 12:47|| 2006-10-26 12:47|| Front Page Top

#9 Lol - how diabolically devious, anon! You are my ex!

I'm outta here!

Posted by .com 2006-10-26 12:48|| 2006-10-26 12:48|| Front Page Top

#10 What is clear to me is that BA needs to be boycotted until such time as a "tiny cross on a necklace" is treated the same as a turban or a bindi or a head scarf or a yarmulka or a priest's collar -- which is to say not treated as pertinent to flying at all.

Posted by Darrell 2006-10-26 12:53|| 2006-10-26 12:53|| Front Page Top

#11 If this were a truly competitive market with few barriers to entry, I'd agree.

I think you're assuming that every other airline is already flying at full capacity. I'm arguing that if all Muslims suddenly refused to fly BA, then there's a good chance that Ms. Eweida's check-in counter (or someone else's) could be closed.

You mean like "more Arabs fly with BA, so no Jews allowed"?

That wouldn't make sense even if it was taken seriously.

Sounds to me like an employee (probably a loyal Rantburg reader) trying to be a hero. Fine, but not on your employer's time, lady.

Posted by Contrarian 2006-10-26 13:22|| 2006-10-26 13:22|| Front Page Top

#12 "probably a loyal Rantburg reader"

Lolololol.

What a prissy pissy ponce.

Posted by .com 2006-10-26 13:27|| 2006-10-26 13:27|| Front Page Top

#13 I think you're assuming that every other airline is already flying at full capacity

Nope.

Posted by lotp 2006-10-26 13:27|| 2006-10-26 13:27|| Front Page Top

#14 Contrarian, do you really believe BA would lose more business than it would gain (esp in the highly profitable ME routes) if it banned Jews and advertised a Judenfrei airline? Though it would lose some American business, I have no doubt the extra business from muslim and (sadly) European passengers would vault it into the world's most profitable airline.

Posted by ed 2006-10-26 13:39|| 2006-10-26 13:39|| Front Page Top

#15 I think you're assuming that every other airline is already flying at full capacity

Nope.

Then I disagree with your reasoning.

do you really believe BA would lose more business

Yes in fact I do. No one would want to be associated with an airline like that, despite what you may think of European society.

What a prissy pissy ponce.

"Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah"

Posted by Contrarian 2006-10-26 14:20|| 2006-10-26 14:20|| Front Page Top

#16 "Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah"

Indeed.

It came to call, sporting a nym-warning to all,
It was not to be trifled with or ignored.
It blathered a bit, impressed with its own wit,
But left the Burg denizens yawning and bored

Frustrated, it upped the ante, wadded up its own panties
And delivered what it believed a devastating blow.
In one parenthetical fart, it confirmed what was known from the start,
It's just another hyper-inflated EUrEgo.

I offer advice simple: pop yourself, little pimple...
If you expect anyone to pay you serious mind.
Playing the fool, with such a tiny tiny tool
Will only earn you derision in kind.

Posted by .com 2006-10-26 14:35|| 2006-10-26 14:35|| Front Page Top

#17 "No one would want to be associated with an airline like that, despite what you may think of European society".

Contrarian: "European Society". You don't even want to go there with the folk that hang out at RB. We're debating amongst ourselves whether it'll be worth the effort to bail Europe out of it's self-made problems "one mo' time" within the past 100 years. Convert, submit, or die Contrarian. Though I don't know you you sure as hell don't sound like someone ready to fight so I know you're not ready to die.

Stand your ground Mrs. Eweida. Rest assured you will be evacauted before the muslims consolidate their take over of the Island. Your name will be at the top of our list. We'll remember who you are.

Posted by Mark Z 2006-10-26 14:51|| 2006-10-26 14:51|| Front Page Top

#18 Mark Z, I don't think there is much of a debate here at RB about going over a third time. If they won't fight for their own damn continent, why the hell should we send our sons and daughters to do it?

Look at another article posted here today called "The Rape of Europe". It states that the Dutch are moving out of the Netherlands, and the Muslims are moving in. Look at the French "response" to the riots in the banlieues. And look at this BS where they would potentially allow a stewardess on a BA flight with a niqab, even though it could be a potential safety hazard if her headcovering slips during an evacuation.

They know their culture and people better than I do, and in so many little ways, they have decided it's not worth it. Fair enough. It's not worth our blood and treasure then, either.

Posted by Swamp Blondie 2006-10-26 15:30|| http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]">[http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ] 2006-10-26 15:30|| Front Page Top

#19 I hear you Swampie...

I'm saddened because I'm not that far removed from "Europe". My great grandfather came to the USA in the late 1890's. I'm just a third generation American. As much as I hate what the Europeans have become I believe there are still a bunch are worth saving. Some how. Some way. We need to get them out. We need to begin to discuss the best way to get them out if the USA will not go back to fight on their behalf. I'm not entirely sure the decision is final that we won't go back again.

Another thing: (if we don't go back) we've got all this "history" in Europe. For example, think of all the original, priceless historical books, manuscripts, and art work that the muzzies will destroy before the islamic transformation is completed. The architecture is gone, I understand that. But the knowledge that built it we can preserve. When do we begin to transfer that "stuff"?

Swampie...you think we might be having a discussion not unlike that of a Byzantine emperor may have had a 1000 years ago? You know, like another point in time when islam destroyed a civilization?

It just feels too strange to even talk about evacuating Europe at this time....I'm not ready for that conversation.

Posted by Mark Z 2006-10-26 16:08|| 2006-10-26 16:08|| Front Page Top

#20 Game, set and match to .com ....

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2006-10-26 17:41|| 2006-10-26 17:41|| Front Page Top

#21 What is clear to me is that BA needs to be boycotted...

I'd suggest that everyone let them know they will: http://www.britishairways.com/travel/askbainter/public/en_gb?source=TOP_contactus

Even if you don't fly often.

Posted by Bulldog 2006-10-26 18:00|| 2006-10-26 18:00|| Front Page Top

#22 When the time comes, all we'll need do is let it be known that visas are available. They'll come. And I've no doubt that key historical bits and bobs will end up on this side of the pond on short- or long-term museum-to-museum loan. We won't get it all, either people or stuff, but it/they won't all go up in flames, either. My mother and her parents had to go into hiding in Holland because their own visa to the US came up for execution ten years later... and truly grateful they were that by the time the war'd ended so many positions were vacated that they were able to take ship in January, 1946. And my synagogue has several Torah scrolls sent over just in time, that survived even though their congregations perished.

My dear Contrarian, we read what your people say and write. No European or Brit would be associated with an airline that was so crass as to actually announce such a policy, but a wink is as good as a nod, as we all know. After all, how many companies accede even yet to the Arab boycott of those doing business with Israel?

Posted by trailing wife 2006-10-26 18:21|| 2006-10-26 18:21|| Front Page Top

#23 .com, you sure got your money's worth for that English degree. You can write snarky poetry on Rantburg. Colour me impressed.

My dear Contrarian, we read what your people say and write.

All's not what it appears to be. In more ways than one.

Posted by Contrarian 2006-10-26 22:07|| 2006-10-26 22:07|| Front Page Top

#24 What is clear to me is that BA needs to be boycotted...

I'd suggest that everyone let them know they will:

Oh goodie!! Cheap tickets to London!!

Posted by Contrarian 2006-10-26 22:08|| 2006-10-26 22:08|| Front Page Top

#25 Another thing: (if we don't go back) we've got all this "history" in Europe. For example, think of all the original, priceless historical books, manuscripts, and art work that the muzzies will destroy before the islamic transformation is completed. The architecture is gone, I understand that. But the knowledge that built it we can preserve. When do we begin to transfer that "stuff"?

This is one of the main reasons we'll probably end up going back "over there" for a third time. Even without retrieving the wealth of historical artifacts, we'll need to fetch all of the nuclear bombs. I doubt we'd have the temerity to simply blast the entire continent for the sake of neutralizing its atomic weapons.

And my synagogue has several Torah scrolls sent over just in time, that survived even though their congregations perished.

Don't ask me why, but even this long after the fact, such a statement saddens me beyond belief. It also steels my resolve that if there is to be another holocaust, this one will be for the Muslims. NEVER FORGET. NEVER AGAIN.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-26 22:24|| 2006-10-26 22:24|| Front Page Top

16:24 sinse
23:49 Zenster
23:43 Zenster
23:37 Zenster
23:25 Contrarian
23:19 Thoth
23:17 Frank G
23:14 Zhang Fei
23:12 RD
23:04 Contrarian
23:02 trailing wife
23:00 DanNY
22:54 Shieldwolf
22:52 Shieldwolf
22:41 wxjames
22:39 Zhang Fei
22:33 Zenster
22:31 Cyber Sarge
22:31 Zenster
22:28 Zenster
22:27 Zenster
22:24 Zenster
22:19 tu3031
22:10 markawarka