More evidence of British prejudice against Hindus. The insufferable Englishmen will trample over Hindu sensitivities at each and every opportunity, fully aware that there will be no consequences, not even a whimper of disapproval from Manmohan Singh.
Contrast this to the deferential treatment accorded to the Mohammedans.
UK: five-year-old girl's passport photo rejected for fear of offending Muslims
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/012702.php
7 comments:
"Manmohan Singh has nothing else to do besides keeping track of who's been kicked out of a job for wearing a nose stud. "
Apparently he does track and make uncharacteristically
noisy protests against silly cartoons in Denmark & Sweden, Muslim terrorist doctors in Australia and moplahs/malabar christists in the gulf.
Therefore, "keeping track of who's been kicked out of a job for wearing a nose stud" should be atleast equally worthwhile, actually more so - given the racist/religious prejudice that motivates such attitudes.
Standing up for your citizens is called "national self esteem", which I'm sure you've never heard about.
Actually, the nose stud is just an excuse. This is clearly a christist lynching, not unlike the prohibition on Hindu religious or cultural symbols in "convent" schools. See article in
The Pioneer:
Indian woman stripped of her job for wearing nose stud in UK
-Nandini Jawli | London
A Hindu worker at Heathrow Airport has lost her job for wearing a tiny nose stud. Amrit Lalji has been sacked just because she wore a small nose stud to work.
She told The Pioneer soon after getting a dismissal letter from Eurest, "I am extremely upset by this. The stud has been part of my personality from a very young age. I also apply kumkum (vermilion) everyday as a Hindu married woman. Now I feel I am being discriminated against."
Amrit Lalji, 43, has been in the UK for the last 25 years. She has been working for most of this time, after coming here from Kenya. She says, "My family is originally from Kutch, Gujarat. As a Hindu, I have imbibed the tradition of wearing the shringar of a married woman from my mother."
She claims that the nose stud has been with her in all her past jobs in the UK. It is for the first time that her employer, Eurest, has objected. She had joined the company, which supplies food and services to British Airway's VIP lounge at Heathrow, 16 months ago.
Amrit Lalji from Stanmore in North-West London was a cleaner and customer relations worker for Eurest. She explains, "I had always made it clear that I wear the stud as part of my Hindu faith. I'm not expecting people to make huge exceptions for me and I could understand if I was wearing a massive stud, but this is a tiny pin."
On Tuesday, the company sent her a dismissal letter. She now has five days to appeal against the decision. Amrit Lalji has approached one of the biggest trade unions -- Britain's General Union -- GMB. Tahir Bhatti of GMB told The Pioneer, "We will first appeal to the company in the next five days, that's the procedure. If they do not take her back then we will go to the Industrial Tribunal."
The Stanmore Swaminarayan temple, where Amrit worships, and the Hindu Council UK have also come out in her support. Bhimji Budia, a trustee of the temple, and Anil Bhanot, managing director of the council, said they would be assisting Amrit in fighting the bias.
Bhanot said, "Her dismissal is unjust under The Equality Act, 2006. This Act has a provision for Religion and Belief. Any discrimination on the basis of religion is illegal." He cited an earlier case where an employee had challenged her suspension at British Airways for wearing a cross. She had won her appeal. This precedence would also help Amrit's case.
According to Budia, the temple would help in fighting the discrimination. They have given a letter to Amrit, quoting Hindu religious scriptures in order to prove that wearing a nose stud is part of Hindu faith.
"My employer told me that wearing a nose stud is not part of the Christian religion so I cannot be allowed," explains Amrit.
Eurest has told the media, "Lalji had been advised of company policy on a number of occasions which states that, with the exception of a plain wedding ring and sleeper earrings, jewellery must not be worn on duty and flesh piercings are not permitted."
The spokesperson added, "Jewellery can harbour bacteria, create a hazard when working with machinery and find its way into food. Her decision not to return to work without the stud contravenes company regulations and she was dismissed."
Hindu Council has responded to this by saying, "If the company concerned allows wedding bands and ear studs, we do not see why Amrit Lalji should not be allowed to wear a small nose stud." The council spokesperson said, "We are second generation Hindus here. Our first generation made many sacrifices, but not any more. We will assert ourselves to a legal point."
The Mayor of London Ken Livingstone has condemned the sacking of Amrit and called for her to be re-instated. He said that he would be writing to the company to reconsider its decision and reinstate her. Livingstone said, "It is an attack on her right to freely express her religion and an attack on her right as a woman to dress as she wishes."
Compare and contrast this with the British Airways reaction to employees wearing the cross
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=418498&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=NEWS&ct=5
I remember Tony Blair calling on the BA to do the 'sensible' thing in this case. Why not the sensible thing for a symbol of the Hindus? Thats easy - it is afterall the Limeys second rate sewer of a country that those folks are living in
Go and ask them
I look at this a bit differently - the victim could have been Hindu/Buddhist/Jewish/Martian/etc.
This is a absolutely CLASSIC sign of cowardice. The very same people who cower and bend over when Muslim thugs intimidate them are trying to take their IMPOTENT frustration on the nearest harmless victim.
Alas the British are no more the ones who bravely fought the Nazis - these are lily livered cowards who have no connection to their grandfathers generation.
A person who gets crapped on by his boss at work sits with his tail between his legs and then goes home and beats up his wife to feel all manly (; oh how brave
And these losers blame their behaviour on some woolly ideology called multi-culturalism or liberalism. If it was because of multi-culturalism then they would have made equal adjustments for the Hindu woman.
The fact is that blaming multi-culturalism is just an excuse to cover up their cowardice.
Instead of fighting back the Hindu organizations must release a public statement saying
"Please return to your normal pastime of picking on the harmless Jews and bending over for the intimidating Muslims"
to continue my previous comment
Would this be considered as Western values which are supposedly very unique?
If I had to predict I would say that the situation is going to get progressively worse. The Jews and Hindus and Buddhists should start making arrangements to move out.
Another incident in the UK involving - this time - a symbol (Swastika) which offended some customers of a fashion chain:
http://satyameva-jayate.org/2007/09/19/zara-swastika-handbag/
Post a Comment