Thursday 29 July 2010

MUSLIM WOMAN WEARING VEIL 'REFUSED BUS RIDE' : There Are Two Sides To Any Story....... The BBC's Version....... And The TRUTH!

The way this article has been manipulated and spun by the BBC is absolutely disgusting...... obscene, even! So the objective of this post is to further expose the BBC's Left-wing bias and their real agenda as the propaganda wing of the Labour Party.


Two Muslim women have claimed they were refused a bus ride because one had her face covered by a veil. The students, both 22 and from Slough, Berkshire, boarded a Metroline bus from Russell Square to Paddington, London,but they said when they presented their tickets on Monday, the driver told them they were a "threat" to passengers and ordered them off the bus.

The firm has started an "urgent" investigation. The Muslim Council of Britain said it was "deeply concerned". (Oooh...... deeply concerned!) The pair, who have made a formal complaint to the bus company, have asked the BBC not to reveal their full names. (Oh, really....... why's that, then?)

Yasmin was wearing a hijab and Atoofa was dressed in a niqab - which covers the face. Yasmin said at first she boarded the bus by mistake when it was not in service to ask where it was going, but was told by the driver to get off. "About 10 minutes later... the passengers started getting on. When I went forward to show my ticket he said, 'Get off the bus'. I presumed he was still angry because I got on the bus before. 

"He said, 'I am not going to take you on the bus because you two are a threat.' 

"I realised it wasn't due to me getting on the bus, this may be a racist attack." (Waaaaaycist, Waaaaaycist...... oh, do fuck off!)

She asked for his contact details but when he refused she began to film him and he covered his face. "I said, 'It's OK for you to cover your face on my recording but it's not OK for my friend to cover her face out of choice?' "There was no point arguing with him, we got off the bus and by then my anger turned into emotion." (That'll be the drink, love!)

However Atoofa, who had her face covered by the veil, said she hoped the driver would be educated about why women wear the traditional Islamic dress, rather than face the sack. "I would like him to understand why we wear it and I think I would like an apology," she added.

"I want him to sit there and talk to me about why he felt the way he felt and maybe to understand where we are coming from." (Why don't you try and understand where he's coming from, dear?!)

A spokesperson from the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) said it could not comment on individual cases, but added it was "deeply concerned". (Oh, my.... they're deeply concerned!)

"Such incidents are sadly becoming more common," the spokesperson said. (No shit! I wonder why?)

"They have been fuelled against the climate of increasing anti-Muslim rhetoric and hostility, in particular on the part of sensationalised stories by the media, demonising Muslims in the eyes of the wider public." (If the shoe fits...... )

And now for the truth.....


A bus driver accused by two students of banning them because of their Islamic dress has been cleared after CCTV showed he had actually barred them for their abusive behaviour. An investigation by Metroline - which operates the No7 bus - found the driver, who could have faced the sack over the allegation, was justified in not allowing the women on his vehicle. (Ahhh, right..... I see!)

The 22-year-olds, Yasmin and Atoofa, from Slough, told the BBC that they had been refused access to the bus at Russell Square because of their dress. Yasmin was wearing a hijab and her face was uncovered while Atoofa was wearing a niqab, which covers the face.

But the Standard has learned that the students, who asked for their full names not to be revealed, were denied entry "due to abusive behaviour towards bus driver and other passengers". (Nooooo!..... surely not?!!!)

On-board CCTV of the incident, on Monday last week, showed the women banging on the front doors and attempting to board the bus when it had come to the end of its run. They then get on through the rear doors and begin arguing with the driver. They get off and wait for the bus to start its journey back to Paddington - but another exchange follows, and the driver refuses to set off unless they disembark.  (Well, I never!!!?)

Metroline said: "We have now reviewed the CCTV and interviewed the bus driver. The circumstances of this incident are not as represented by the bus passengers." (It's not as represented by the BBC either - what a big surprise...... fucking, commie BBC - Labour propaganda whores!!!!!)

So there you have it, folks, for anyone who was still in any doubt, (there can't be that many), if it's the unbiased truth you're looking for...... stay well away from the BBC, Britain's very own Far-Left disinformation service.

Enhanced by Zemanta


Sheriff said...

Well done Spidey, nicely researched ;) . I, like many others, first read this story as "Nice one bus driver but that's you fucked on the altar of multi-culti" :( . Congrats to Metroline too for sticking up for their staff :-D .

DEATH to the BBC >:o  co-prostitutes of the evil EU.

Sheriff said...

Good piece Spidey, I have long since stopped believing what the Beeb has to say (which is a shame as they were once well respected)
Personally I think these sort of happenings are going on in the hope of being able to claim compensation, there is a great deal wrong with a society that does not prosecute those who try this sort of thing on.

Sheriff said...

Cheers, mate ;) the BBC in it's present form needs to be nuked >:o and replaced with something impartial that actually reports the news!  :-P

Sheriff said...

Thanks, Indy, the current incarnation of the BBC is an insult to our intelligence as well as a complete disgrace for a so-called "democracy"! >:o >:o >:o

I honestly think there's a lot more than compensation involved with these bogus claims - the compensation, if it's eventually awarded, is just a bonus. ;)

Sheriff said...

Now you're talking, CH, that would be a far more appropriate use of public funds than the Lefty PC squandering of taxpayers' money that we've seen over the last thirteen years! ;) :-P

As I said to Indy, (below), I think there is a lot more to all of these "racist" allegations from Muslims than compensation - I believe they take every opportunity they possibly can to shout "waaaaaycist" in their attempts to smear the indigenous population and show us in the worst light they can...... cunts! >:o >:o >:o

Sheriff said...

Of course they do Spidey ..

In the same way that these women deliberately choose to wear headgear which obscures their faces ..

As "Banned" pointed out the other day, there is no religious reason or "demand" for them to do so .. They do it because they know, full well that in most cases, whatever they do wrong .. they will, almost certainly be legally "bomb-proof"

They screech "Waaaaycist" because they've learned that it pays to do so ... however it can only "pay" if we permit it to do so ..

If we challenge each & every time it is used and insist on the allegation being proven (and there are plenty of cases & situations where racism has been used against the indigenous population) it will cease to be the "elephant in the room" which it now is ... for example one simply cannot have "positive" & "negative" discrimination .. Discrimination is discrimination is discrimination etc ..

The latest example of which is the statement by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office regarding its recruiting policy .. That policy urgently needs to be challenged in the Courts .. and if I were looking for a job (which I'm not) and if I were interested in that line of business, I'd be seeking some legal advice ..

Sheriff said...

I completely agree, CH, I've always been enraged every time I heard Labour, especially Batty Hattie Harpy, spouting their typical commie shite about "positive dicrimination" - as always with Labour, the term they use to describe it is the complete opposite of what it actually is! >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o

And here's what the Muslim extremist cunts are now going to be doing in France to try and get round the burkha ban......." type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="170" height="140

Sheriff said...

When you look at it rationally though, that bus driver did have a responsibility to his passengers - they could easily have been yobettes under the burqas.  He showed great responsibility.

Sheriff said...

Absolutely James ..

As did his employers .. not many "managers" these days would bother to check for possible evidence, they'd just take the easy option & accept things at face value .. particularly in companies or organisations where potential promotion or personal advancement was at stake ..

Many more "Brownie" points & "feathers-in-caps" to be scored by "nabbing" an alleged "Waaaaycist"  ...

I'd far sooner see this guy being granted Legal Aid (if required) to clear his name .. than the public money likely to be squandered on compensating that animal Huntley .... Grrrrrr  ..   >:o :-$ :-$ :-$

Sheriff said...

Too right Spidey ...

Which is why we should now, as a matter of routine, employ precisely the same methods and tactics which they use ..

We cannot hope to win this ongoing battle by playing according to "Queensberry" rules .. if they want to play dirty & underhanded games, we must be prepared to do likewise ..

After all .. What's good for the Goose, is also good for the Gander ... ;)

Sheriff said...

Quite right, James, and according to the CCTV, they were behaving like yobettes, too! >:o >:o >:o >:o

What are the chances of these two being prosecuted? :-P Pretty damned slim, I'd think! >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o

Sheriff said...

Good idea, CH, but who's more likely to get legal aid....... the bus driver or Huntley? :( >:o

As far as I'm concerned, Huntley got the thumping he deserved...... one of many, I hope! ;) :-P :-D

Sheriff said...

Exactly, CH, and if we got rid of all the PC shit that spawned the Human Rights Act, the compensation culture and so-called "hate crime",  then a lot of this crap would end immediately. Labour introduced all of their commie bollocks to beat us, the indigenous population, down >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o

Will Cleggeron do anything about it? *DONT_KNOW* Don't hold your breath, mate! >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o >:o

Sheriff said...

Ah, yes, CH, as Gorgonzola Brownfinger would say...... "it's in their DNA"! ;)

Sheriff said...

These are just the sort of slack old chav slappers who'll be on the lookout for a public freebie to get the tired, saggy old horse collar tightened up on the NHS before getting wed ..

Sheriff said...

Given the behaviour of this pair .. and given the reputation of their Hometown, it occurs to me to wonder whether their insistence on witholding their identities & obscuring their faces might be a little more sinister than at first thought ..

Could it possibly be that they were in breach of ASBO's .. by being in a place from which they were already banned ???

It wouldn't surprise me in the least .. I lived for a number of years in West London (quite close to Heathrow) .. and one cannot live in that area for long, without hearing stories about antics of the inhabitants of "Sluff" on a regular basis ..

Just a thought ...

Sheriff said...

I wouldn't be at all surprised, CH, that's yet another reason these fucking "masks" should be banned! >:o

I was a bit further in than you - just off Fulham Palace Road, so I used to hear plenty about fucking Sluff, mate, and I used to walk past the Peabody Estate pretty much every day - that's the place where those terrorist cunts were arrested, (the news pictures showed them out on the balcony of their flat). >:o >:o