Quote: zooo @ May 2 2010, 12:43 AM BSTHa, I'm sure it suits you down to the ground...
I didn't think I'd ever posted a picture of my face on here...but you're certainly right. 
Ban the Burka? Page 9
Ninja infiltration the real danger with the Burqa
Quote: sootyj @ May 2 2010, 12:42 AM BSTNope it's true. They have to wear plastic arm protectors, do keep up.
What's your source? How do you know that to be true?
Quote: Kevin Murphy @ May 2 2010, 12:47 AM BSTWhat's your source? How do you know that to be true?
Two seconds on Google:
Quote: Kevin Murphy @ May 2 2010, 12:47 AM BSTWhat's your source? How do you know that to be true?
Durr. Do keep up Kevin. This is 'knee-jerk opinion'. There's no need for there to be a basis or anything.
Quote: DaButt @ May 2 2010, 12:49 AM BSTTwo seconds on Google:
Dude, I'd already read the Mail and Telegraph articles. Those aren't primary sources. Little more than propaganda.
Quote: Rob H @ May 2 2010, 12:45 AM BSTI didn't think I'd ever posted a picture of my face on here...but you're certainly right.
Quote: Kevin Murphy @ May 2 2010, 12:52 AM BSTDude, I'd already read the Mail and Telegraph articles. Those aren't primary sources. Little more than propaganda.
People and organizations were mentioned and quoted - what more do you want? Just because you don't like the source doesn't mean something isn't true.
I read the Guardian everyday and that paper is notorious for dropping difficult stories. The Mail may lie the Guardian omits.
Quote: zooo @ May 2 2010, 12:57 AM BST
Ach, it's not all bad. I'm sure hunchbacks are meant to be lucky. 
And this liberal "if it doesn't match my world view it's a libertarian lie/conspiracy."
Aaaggghh
I'm starting to understand why people buy guns and vote Palin.
It's up there with doing nothing to help Muslims who's mosques are being taken over by Islamist arse holes.
Quote: sootyj @ May 2 2010, 1:01 AM BSTAnd this liberal "if it doesn't match my world view it's a libertarian view."
Aaaggghh
I'm starting to understand why people buy guns and vote Palin.
It's up there with doing nothing to help Muslims who's mosques are being taken over by Islamist arse holes.
I really cannot work out what your point is here.
N.B. in the need for clarity SOME muslim medics choose not to uncover their lower arms. SOME don't. This is a case of special pleading for SOME muslim medics.
It doesn't affect my view that patient safety comes first, extra expense should be met by the individual and special pleading is not always a good thing.
Quote: Rob H @ May 2 2010, 1:03 AM BSTI really cannot work out what your point is here.
Yup I can see will modify
Quote: DaButt @ May 2 2010, 12:57 AM BSTPeople and organizations were mentioned and quoted - what more do you want? Just because you don't like the source doesn't mean something isn't true.
The sources from the Telgraph article:
"New guidance from the Department of Health"
That guidance would be a primary source. Where is it? I want to read it.
Since it does not appear to be easily Googleable, I'll assume the Telegraph is telling the truth about the document's contents.
There's absolutely nothing in there remotely controversial as far as I can see.
"staff can wear disposable sleeves which are elasticated at the wrist and elbow when in contact with patients."
So, the DoH has found a way to satisfy Muslim doctors' modesty requirements while still protecting patients from infection? Everybody's happy.
"The guidance also states that using alcohol gel to cleanse hands between treating patients does not contravene strict Muslim rules on alcohol."
In other words, healthcare staff have to use alcohol-based gel, whether they like it or not. No concessions to religion there.
This is an example of the hygience policy working. The Muslim doc quit, so she's no longer a threat to patients.