Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« It doesn't even make sense | Main | Teachers' lessons »

Monday, October 24, 2005

Who runs this joint, anyway?

Courtesy of LGF, this little tidbit of pure stupidity...

Piggy_bank_big British banks are banning piggy banks because they may offend some Muslims.

Halifax and NatWest banks have led the move to scrap the time-honoured symbol of saving from being given to children or used in their advertising, the Daily Express/Daily Star group reports here.

Muslims do not eat pork, as Islamic culture deems the pig to be an impure animal.

Salim Mulla, secretary of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, backed the bank move.

"This is a sensitive issue and I think the banks are simply being courteous to their customers," he said.

Shame on every British bank that would impliment such an idiotic capitulation, and shame on every Briton that would patronize such an institution.

Poor Piglet...Just can't catch a break.

North American Patriot

Posted by Wonder Woman on October 24, 2005 | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Who runs this joint, anyway?:


In some ways I think of this as marketing. What is their motive for doing this? Get more muslim customers (profit) or fear of reprisals(dhimmitude)? Either way it's pretty sad that some muslims are so hyper sensitive.

Posted by: soup | 2005-10-24 12:39:50 PM

Sounds like the Great British Breakfast (bacon, egg, pork sausage) hasn't long to live, either. The pig, of course, is the animal that most resembles the human in physiology, which is why it was once favoured for testing some drugs. Despite its usual living conditions, its internal environment is remarkably "clean" and disease-free.

The English language must also be sanitised: no longer will politicians be "at the trough"; they won't be practising "pork-barrel politics"; nor "bringing home the bacon" for their constituents.

Whose country indeed? The UK has been seized by the political correctness virus. Expect many more casualties. The patient might even not survive.

Posted by: Patrick B | 2005-10-24 1:22:26 PM

Good point, soup. With Britain's dramatic change in demographics, and no end in sight, it would seem any business that wishes to flourish will have to view every initiative through the eyes of the dominant crybabies.
Ask yourself...Are we very far behind?
Pretty sad indeed.

Posted by: Wonder Woman | 2005-10-24 1:41:39 PM

WW: Well,we've almost totally elimated any reference to Christmas in public schools, and just try to find a card that actually says "Merry Christmas" instead of "Season's Greetings" or "Happy Holidays".


Posted by: Mark Collins | 2005-10-24 2:04:16 PM

Yup, and it stinks Mark...it really stinks.

Posted by: Wonder Woman | 2005-10-24 2:27:22 PM

Considering the ACLU propaganda in the US to remove christianity in the public life (at least 8 hours every day), this looks to me like the same kind of moronic activities.

In UK, there is no ACLU, but lots of muslims. Nice people except they beat women, kill them, rape them. Fine people except they teach terrorists to do mass killings of which we had examples last Summer.

To thank them, banks do them little favours. If British people still have some guts, I invite them to boycott those banks. Go to the unions and have them boycott any financial institution more muslim than truly british.

Someone has to take a stand. Do readers know how many muslim countries persecute Christians? Recently in Thailand, some teachers were given 3 years of prison because they had accepted to teach Christian songs to muslim children. The children were asking to attend the lectures.

Posted by: Rémi houle | 2005-10-24 3:36:23 PM

Some chicken. Some neck.

Those wacky Brits. I wonder what got into them ... oh well.

More socialist kool-aid anyone?

Posted by: Justzumgai | 2005-10-24 3:52:12 PM

Jews don't eat pork, but I don't ever remember them complaining about piggy banks. Why are the sensitivities of muslims so much more important? Is it because they whine more? Is it those stupid costumes they wear?

Posted by: Raging Ranter | 2005-10-24 8:33:52 PM

Strong horse, weak horse ... which one is supposed to be attractive? I can't seem to recall, but I'd bet the Muslims sure do.

Posted by: Leonidas | 2005-10-24 9:08:34 PM

Strong horse, weak horse ... which one is supposed to be attractive? I can't seem to recall, but I'd bet the Muslims sure do.

Posted by: Leonidas | 2005-10-24 9:10:27 PM

Strong horse, weak horse ... which one is supposed to be attractive? I can't seem to recall, but I'd bet the Muslims sure do.

Posted by: Leonidas | 2005-10-24 9:11:13 PM

Strong horse, weak horse ... which one is supposed to be attractive? I can't seem to recall, but I'd bet the Muslims sure do.

Posted by: Leonidas | 2005-10-24 9:12:27 PM

Strong horse, weak horse ... which one is supposed to be attractive? I can't seem to recall, but I'd bet the Muslims sure do.

Posted by: Leonidas | 2005-10-24 9:13:12 PM

Raging, I think it's because deep down inside we are very concerned about what muslims will do. Jews don't have the same rep.

Posted by: soup | 2005-10-25 12:51:27 AM

soup is right; read this column from today's Halifax Chronicle-Herald for an example:


Summary: a newspaper in Denmark commissioned some cartoonists to draw up sketches of Mohammed, as a test of what would happen. After publishing the mostly satirical images, the paper started receiving hate mail, death threats, demands for public apologies (the newspaper refused), and had to hire additional security.

Posted by: Ian in NS | 2005-10-25 6:19:29 AM

Ah...The 'Religion of Peace', indeed.

Posted by: Wonder Woman | 2005-10-25 7:39:03 AM

I spoke to Mr. Right last night about this. Most of our money sits with the HalifaxBOS in Scotland. I have decided that I will write a strongly worded letter at first, and then we'll move our accounts over to our other bank, the Royal Bank of Scotland. So far they haven't lost their minds. So far.


Posted by: RightGirl | 2005-10-25 8:36:25 AM

"BBC to launch Arabic TV channel"


One step closer folks... I wonder what they'll do to the Monty Python episodes?

Posted by: Maple stump | 2005-10-25 10:16:28 AM

Private sector companies are now the most accommodating when it comes to Muslim "sensitivities". Headscarves are permitted, payer-rooms provided and now piggy-banks, as foolish as it may seem, are banished. We gradually surrender our cultural sovereignty (and yes, piggy-banks ARE "cultural sovereignty")in order to make a fast buck from the greatest number of people

Individuals could boycott these banks to protest I suppose, but the publicity generated would attract more than enough Muslim customers to make up for those clients who'd taken their business elsewhere.

It's a lose-lose situation......for us!

Posted by: John Palubiski | 2005-10-25 12:08:01 PM


Not only did the newspapers refuse to apologize, the President of Denmark refused to meet with ambassadors from 11 Muslim countries who wanted to snivel about being offended.

'This is a matter of principle. I won't meet with them because it is so crystal clear what principles Danish democracy is built upon that there is no reason to do so,' said [president Anders Fogh] Rasmussen.

'As prime minister, I have no power whatsoever to limit the press - nor do I want such a power,' [president Rasmussen] said. 'It is a basic principle of our democracy that a prime minister cannot control the press.'

It's my understanding that several of the cartoonists are in hiding, having received death threats from other ambassadors of the Religion of Peace.


Posted by: Darrell | 2005-10-25 4:49:51 PM

Does all this mean that we can no longer call Toronto "Hogtown" and that Inspector Frost cannot call lies "porkies"?


Posted by: Mark Collins | 2005-10-25 5:42:53 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.