News Ticker >
[ September 23, 2017 ]

FATWA! Hunted in America: Pamela Geller’s New Book from Milo’s Dangerous Publishing House

[ September 23, 2017 ]

Berkeley Cancels Free Speech Week: Casus Belli

[ September 23, 2017 ]

Napolitano: Berkeley “Free Speech Week” to feature “controversial and noxious ideas”

[ September 23, 2017 ]

Canada: Muslim bus driver charged with sexually assaulting 15-year-old disabled girl

[ September 23, 2017 ]

Oklahoma Muslim: “I felt oppressed so I beheaded her…That’s what Allah said in the Quran”

[ September 22, 2017 ]

A Stella Open Thread

[ September 22, 2017 ]

Vanity Fair: “Milo Yiannopoulos’s Fyre-Festival Free Speech Week Is Canceled, Says Everyone but Milo”

[ September 22, 2017 ]

Czech President Zeman: Islamic Refugees are a Trojan Horse Phenomenon

[ September 22, 2017 ]

Belgium: 119 Islamic Institutions Investigated for “Extremism” in 2016

[ September 22, 2017 ]

In Pamela Geller beheading plot, Muslims ‘hoped to achieve martyrdom’

Security Guards Ordered to Remove Pro-Police Patch Donned Post-Terror Attack


Security guards for University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust in Britain were ordered to remove Union flag badges they donned to show solidarity with police, post-Westminster Palace terror attack, because it is offensive to some.

Or, more specifically — offensive to one. Somebody made an anonymous complaint, and the pro-police patches have to go.

Security guards were told to take off the pro-police patch — that it’s offensive.

The badges are similar in style to those sold by the charity Care of Police Survivors, a group that provides aid and comfort to family members who lost a loved one serving in the field of law enforcement.

And they became popular additions to police uniforms after the March 23 radical Islam terror attack at Westminster that left police officer Keith Palmer dead.

But now, someone’s complained, and the badges have to go.

As the Bristol Post reported:

“The badges have been a recent thing,’ confirmed the Bristol Post source. ‘The security guards got new stab vests that had Velcro on them and so decided to get the badges.’ they said.

“‘It is an insult to the British people that they are having to be taken off.

“‘All the security staff are upset about it and cannot quite believe there has been a complaint.

“‘The staff are doing their best for everyone in the hospital, trying to keep people safe and a complaint like this is made.

“‘Personally I find it offensive that someone is offended that much by the Union Jack.'”

  • AlgorithmicAnalyst

    I noticed something similar here in USA, a certain government organization used to give away T-shirts each year during the Bush administration that had their logo along with an American flag and “Take Pride in America”, both of which disappeared from those shirts during the RiceARonin administration.

    • Bush 43 shouldn’t have allowed that. Obama was right…do it your own time and dime.

  • Mahou Shoujo

    britain is under the domination of islam, why it even pretends to be anything else is a waste of time. All it takes is one muslim’s command, and the country will grovel like the mutton it has become.

  • santashandler

    Soon, we’ll have people here in the U.S. complaining of others who are patriotic. Maybe some POS will complain on Memorial Day that too many U.S. flags are being flown. Will that require everyone to take them down. Meanwhile, there can be a dozen or more flag burners posting videos of their vile acts and……silence.

    • Not the same thing. They aren’t on employer time.

      • santashandler

        Well, it shouldn’t matter. Any employer who discourages, or penalizes their employees from proudly displaying the flag should be run out of business.

        • Keith

          It is a bit difficult to run the National Health Service out of Business. It is the main provider of Health Care in the UK and it is the only provider of emergency care.

  • A uniform is a uniform. If this is allowed, what other alterations on the uniform will be permitted? Such can be worn off the clock.

    • Keith

      They seem to be able to change the uniform to allow the hijab. Why can’t they allow the wearing of a Union Flag? Which in case you are unaware is the national flag of the United Kingdom. The Hijab and burqa have nothing to do with the UK being a foreign import.
      Where I live, in the UK, they hospital has allowed staff to wear the Hijab, there are now hospital gowns that look more like burqas than hospital gowns. All to accommodate the followers of one hate filled religion.

      • A hijab (or turban or yarmulke) doesn’t actually alter the uniform. The wearing of any pin does.

        • old003


        • whoselineisitanyway

          Muslim dimwit.

        • Keith

          Did you go to school? What a stupid answer.
          Of course anything that is not part of the uniform as designed for the company by the designer changes the uniform.
          You are obviously too stupid to even understand what a uniform is. Before you make an answer to any comment why don’t you engage your brain, if you have a working one that is.

          • Employers have to adhere to religious garments within reason and thus have that written into the uniform. This is different.

          • Keith

            What is different about it, a uniform is a uniform. Nurses are not allowed to wear a cross over their uniform so why should a special case be made for Islamic dress?
            Going even further going into a bank I and any one else have to remove any form of clothing that hides the face but muslims expect to be able to enter wearing the niqab.
            Both of these examples show how supremacist Islam is as we keep being told that it is not compulsory but their own choice to wear it. If it is voluntary why should any company be expected to make changes to their uniform code? If it is compulsory people like you should stop lying and tell the truth that they have to wear it.

          • A cross dangles and can be a vector for pathogen transmission. A hijab doesn’t. One can ban the niqab, however, for security reasons. But taking it further, one can’t deny one the right to wear a kippah, and that isn’t a potential vector. BTW, try this on for size: a hijab actually controls hair. I would not want a female nurse to have uncontrolled hair (tie it back, wear it short, or wear a hair net).

          • Keith

            I notice you have failed to answer whether the hijab is compulsory or personal choice, why is that? I ask again is the hijab compulsory or voluntary. We keep being told it is voluntary so there should be no problem if it is not part of the uniform. If it is compulsory it makes a lie to those who keep telling us it is a voluntary show of their faith. So which is it?
            A cross doesn’t have to dangle. Some one I know wears one as a broach which is pinned in place. She cant wear it with her uniform but a muslim demanding to wear a hijab would be allowed.
            A uniform is a uniform when you start making different allowances for different beliefs. If one belief is allowed to have a special dispensation for things they want to wear as you said earlier where do you stop. You seem to be happy with alterations to uniforms that you are happy with but will not accept alterations that you disagree with.

          • The hijab is a choice. As for the cross, it would need to be sewn into place to be permissible.

          • Keith

            If as you say the hijab is a choice, I assume you mean a personal choice, then in that case there is no need to change uniform requirements for someones personal choice. As you say in your original comment that I responded too you said “Such can be worn off the clock.” So that applies equally to the hijab that you have said is choice not compulsory.
            As for the cross why must it be sewn in place for it to be acceptable? A cross that is pinned in place would be just as acceptable.
            Now you are trying to say that the uniform should be changed to accommodate a muslims personal choice to wear an item of clothing but a cross must be sewn into place which would then make it part of the uniform which would be unacceptable to many people as they are not Christian.

  • Grant Woodside

    It is Britain, the Union Jack, Brits should be outraged
    And the majority probably are
    A uniform is not just a uniform
    It is a symbol of pride and honour for one’s country
    I cannot imagine a Canada or USA
    Where representations of our respective flags are not permitted on any uniform
    It is well past the time for countries to start saying No More

Pin It on Pinterest