Philip Hollobone – Heroic Prophet or Complete Idiot?

Brace yourself for the outrage (it’s already off to a flier in the ‘comments’ section of the Daily Mail’s online content). Philip Hollobone, the Tory MP for Kettering, has been warned that he may fall foul of the Equality Act as a result of his claim that he will refuse to meet constituents who wear a burqa or a niqab. You can be reasonably sure that the Little Englanders and self-righteous warriors against ‘political correctness’ will have a field day defending this objectionable little toad’s ‘right’ to create division and enforce lazy stereotypes in the name of protecting Britain’s national culture.

This often tends to be the culture of ‘freedom’ and ‘tolerance’ which Hollobone and his ilk like to boast about when they puff their chests out and become all dewy-eyed when the Union Flag is waved around at Tory conference time, but it appears you should only be free and tolerated if you’re white and Christian – anything that differs from the formula must be treated with suspicion and thinly-veiled (no pun intended) hate.

Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale, has already voiced his concerns about breathing the same political air as the ‘toxic’ Tories, and it isn’t difficult to see why when an idiot like Hollobone crawls out of the woodwork. For all the work David Cameron has done trying to portray his party as modern and liberal, there is always the suspicion that you don’t have to look too far to find an army of Hollobones lurking on the Tory benches, foaming at the mouth about family values, tradition and ‘uncontrolled’ immigration.

And of course, immigration is what this issue is all about. Hollobone’s prejudices tap into deeply held suspicions whipped up by the tabloid press that foreigners are coming ‘over here’ and taking all our jobs while selling our British, Christian identity down the river as they ruthlessly construct their Islamic state. This analysis coveniently avoids any discussion of what the British ‘identity’ really is, of course. No mention here of the historical influx of Angles, Saxons, Vikings, Romans, Normans and the like – perhaps the BNP should persuade their friends in the press to have a crack at this ‘menace’ while they’re doing such sterling work on burkas.

Hollobone isn’t the first idiot to emerge from the Tory backbenches and he certainly won’t be the last. While some of the Conservative grassroots understand the concept of appealing to the centre ground of politics, there are just as many who believe the Richard Littlejohns of this world are the straight-talking prophets who warn of Britain’s impending doom at the hands of the foreigners and queers who secretly plot the overthrow of everything they hold dear. Now, in Philip Hollobone, it seems they may have stumbled upon a new hero.

Click here to vote in the Total Politics Best Blogs Poll 2010



  1. I think the point that Mr. Hollobone, and those that support him miss, is that the UK is a multi-cultural society. Whatever our own personal opinions on the curious traditions of the world’s religions; we would have to “turn the tanker around” and get on the road to state secularism, in the fashion of France, to make this kind of statement worth exploring. The other problem is that it is impossible to have a mature discussion about this because of the hideous tone of discussion that would ensue. Did you see the hatred whipped up by The Daily Express “newspaper” and its ilk last week. It concerned modesty windows in Walsall swimming baths. (podcast last week’s Now Show on R4 for this). Personally, I think it would be good to have a national debate about secularism v multi-culturalism but how on earth can that discussion take place with the kind of nastiness that it inevitably whips up?

  2. Sent to Maryam Namazie – One Law For All!

    Hi Maryam:

    A couple of articles have caused quite a stir over here, also, your guy in Kettering (I lived in Kettering from 1955 to 1963) tries to shine the light on the de facto abuse/slavery of UK Muslim women under Islam:

    Newt’s article: response this morning:

    My response to the guy below.


    —– Original Message —–
    From: Chris Allinson
    Cc: ; ;
    Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:54 AM
    Subject: This Week in Crazy: Newt Gingrich

    Hi there:

    Have never had any time for miscreant Republican intellectual (sic) Newt, however, his blog this week: touched a nerve to quite a response. Missing was any definition or understanding by most bloggers of the real problem: that from North Africa to Malaysia over 2 billion (possibly over 3 billion?) are subject to some variation of Islam, the most offensive religion/lifestyle imaginable in this day of secular statute, human rights and Law! Islam is rapidly spreading as Muslims flee the rigors of Islamic states, however, still remain subject to Sharia tribunals in the EC/UK Muslim enclaves they end up in.

    Made some comments to posters:

    “Islam is religion with a catch, Sharia Law, that parallel’s secular statute for the Muslim faithful wherever they are and have Sharia tribunals in communities. We banned Sharia and other religious tribunals in Ontario, Canada due to endemic human rights abuse – our Charter of rights and freedoms rules on ‘rights for all’ and is based on the UN Universal declaration on human rights (1948)*. Zaki Ameen was very eloquent on the rigors of Sharia Law, the word of Mohammed**:

    * it took until about 1957, however, every current member state signed this, including Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afghanistan – while they continued their human right abuse of women with impunity!

    ** the veritable word of God (sic).


    “Faruque’s quotes are the smokescreen that is Islam – one day spent at a Sharia tribunal and all will become evident! Islam/Sharia Law rules from North Africa to Malaysia – a Neanderthal 8th century reality for over 2 billion; the goal of Osama bin Laden realized as Karzai imposed Sharia Law on Afghanistan’s Shiite women last year right under the noses of Nato and the US military! Hirsi Ali and Zaki Ameen have done the work to instruct the West in the true intent of Islam: & Suggest read this stuff, get educated on the mayhem that is yet to come, courtesy of Islam!


    Right-on Tabitha – assimilation not an option as, unlike Christianity, Islam has not evolved to the point of a ‘reformation’ – a rebirth that mandated a disconnect between ‘religious faith/beliefs’ and Law! The result throughout Europe was secular statute and rule of Law, precedent setting for Western societies. Islam/Sharia Law can never accept secular statute – the Ankara review has failed in its attempt to bridge Islam to the secular West (for Turkey to gain EC membership). Also, the verbal machinations of Islam’s intellectuals (sic) of the ilk of chameleon, Tariq Ramadan: ‘He claims that there is no conflict between being both a Muslim and a European; a Muslim must accept the laws of his country. But he’s opposed to some politicians or people who try to circumvent or to give a new sense of their own laws.’ Which means that Sharia Law has a higher standing for Muslims than secular statute in the UK/EC – hence lawyers in the UK are now taking client cases and regularly appear before Sharia tribunals, i.e. the de facto recognition of Sharia as ‘statute’ for Muslims in the UK – and the government does nothing about it as intimidated by the power of 2.5 million Muslims who vote!

    Newt, inadvertently, raised the US conscientious on what is becoming the true battle East v. West: statute! Islam is totally incompatible with secular statute as women and children are ‘chattels’ by definition under Islam. Islam is simply a bad-religion (as was Christianity, pre-reformation) – a reformation of Islam is not possible as the first disconnect would have to be that Mohammed did not speak the word of God! There has been no solution for 1300 years, non expected in this millennia either.

    Suggest try to keep the human rights issue in focus, the best service that the West can extend to Muslim women is to hold their men (and clerics) in utter contempt: and, as we did here in Ontario, Canada – ban all religious tribunals as secular societies require ‘one law for all’: one statute, no exceptions!


  3. To answer the question – Philip Hollobone is much more than heroic prophet. He is nothing short of a Super Hero. As to is the French President. Why introduce the word ‘prophet’ in the question, is this an islamic way of asking the question? Wearing a Burqa/Burka or niquab only attracts more attention not less. its far easier to blend in and not be noticed by wearing heals. If some wear the burqu and niqab for fear of being seen by their opressing men out in public, the question to ask is what lies beneath? Lipstick, make up, heels? When will the latter be seen and by whom, the person they are on the way to see or for an opressive man back at home whom is the only man allowed to seer his multiple wives look pretty?

    Will Tony Blairs family and perhaps our Government soon convert?

    Each to their own but make no mistake, Philip Hollobone is a Hero to many females. He made me have faith in myself and not some garment or religion, perhaps we should have all been born clothed or masked? Philip Holobone is the star in the Chronicles of Riddick when asked the question convert or fight.

    Just a final question, if wearing a burqua and attempting to communicate with an individual/MP whom does so only through lip reading, how would this be possible? By this it must be assumed that all MP’s must have excellent hearing in order to be an MP. Is this not a disability discrimination offence?

    Philip – there are those that support you, including supressed women whom others might feel you are discriminating against – not so. Thanks for everything.

  4. indeed finally, and pleased to see someone make sense and become free/speak out. Wonder how Mr Blunkett would feel if his constuents had a culture preventing them from using vocals with anyone other than an ‘opressive man’. He couldn’t see them nor hear them, how would they communicate? what does an MP do? Similarly, why should Philip Hollobone have his vision taken away from him. Why should anyone whom might be deaf or blind be affraid to stand as an MP or councillor for being unable to lip read (or otherwise) the words of a female masked in a burka. How is this freedom, fairness or responsibility?

    1. I am aspirational and want to ‘join’ my government as invited to do so by David Cameron’s Contract to ‘join the government’.
    2. I am deaf.
    3. I apply anyway with hope and courage.
    4. I become an MP.
    5. I can not communicate with muslim constituents that wear a burka/veil.
    6. I table a bill for face covering in order to HELP me help my female mulsim constituents/colleagues.
    7. I get called a racist!
    8. Verdict – political and media hypocracy for trying to do the right thing in the local and ‘National Interest’.

    Agree Philip Hollobone and Sarkozy are heros’s. If this government doesnt stand up for us, maybe the BNP/UKIP/EDL are all that is really left? Will the current government give us any choice? Failing that I am moving, let this nation then be filled up to the brim. In the old days they once joked ‘if everyone in india or china jumped up and down together there would be a global earthquake’ – this is more likely to occur on an island called the UK with its current level of population and predicted growth.

    What is meant by bringing Net Immigration down means that so long as enough of us Brits leave the Uk than foreigners coming in, then all is well. Yes we all understand that in order to be part of the ‘bigsociety’ and take responsibility, we should simply leave the country to help the government meet its target and make way for the hundreds of thousands of indians the EU wants to bring in through secret deals for cheap indian labour. India gained independance from the brits for its own country has lots of money and now it seems EU wants India to take over in the UK.

    1. OK, so a deaf MP might struggle to lip read someone wearing a burka (although presumably he/she would still be able to read a letter) but what is Hollobone’s excuse? He’s not deaf so why would he need to insist on the removal of a burka? Unless, of course, he’s a narrow-minded bigoted idiot. As indeed are you, ‘Priya’.

  5. and well there we have it, mature intelligent debate shines through once again. Anyone recall Labour’s Gordon Brown using such offensive language. Good riddens he’s gone for calling that lady a Bigot albeit dont recall a double barrel insult now surely thats an all time low, ouch. Must admit wasnt ‘He’s’ wore Burka’s or Burqua’s depending on how its spelt, no expert here sorry. Time to move on, very good points Priya and whomever is now ‘free’, assume female – good on you sweetheart.

  6. Hi James, with respect i do apologies for airing my and my colleagues thoughts and experiences and also for being what you refer to as a narow-minded bigoted idiot.

    No no offense was intended to anyone. The thoughts were not merely about Philip Hollobone as a standalone MP (whom i and many of my Muslim/Asian/English colleagues admire) but also any other individuals and the impact on society’s ‘daily functions’, for example someone aspiring to be an MP/Councillor who MAY otherwise be detered or simple scenarios of buying a ticket at a train station/airport/passport control/Bus station/Supermarket etc. etc. examples could go on and on whereby writing/reading letters may not be practical, particularly with long ques/many constituents involved. Hence the points were the bill itself and the restrictions that could deter individuals with aspirations but may limit their communication channels in such ‘roles’. I could respond further to your spefic point but admittedly was disspointed by your insult making me feel somewhat ‘opressed’ in itself and therefore i will not go any further on this occasion/blog and will not check for a response. However, good luck on the debate whatever your views, i respect them as i respect all views in a democracy. I handnt realised this blog allowed bloggers to insult each other in this manner (my fault i guess). Each to their own opinion. I pardon your leave and apologise once again for being a narow-minded bigoted idiot. Thanks Priya and Asif.

  7. In the interests of an open and transparent debate I feel I should point out that the comments from ‘Priya’, ‘Mark Wilson’ and ‘Free & No Longer Oppressed’ all come from the same IP address. Either an astonishing coincidence that all seem to be using the same wi-fi hotspot, or an example of weapons-grade trolling. Decide for yourselves…

  8. I feel most people are missing the point with regards to Hollobone’s proposal for a ban on face coverings. It is well known that covering one’s face is intimidating-think of balaclavas, tights over the head, and people being asked to remove crash helmets inside shops. Seeing a walking tent with black sunglasses and black gloves on is, for me, also pretty intimidating. Covering the face creates a huge barrier between the wearer and the rest of the world, and inevitably has an impact on the wearer’s life as all their interaction with others will have to take place around this barrier. Not only that, but it does appear as a statement rather than an act of modesty to me-modesty is not flaunting your cleavage or wearing clothes that barely cover your genitals, or that are so tight that everything’s on show. Being swathed in black cloth like this-sometimes with extra layers like the aforementioned glasses and gloves, or the metal contraptions some wear on their faces-is not modest but a sign to the rest of the public advertising the fact that the wearer is a Muslim, and also that they are not a member of the Western world-you would, if asked for an initial impression, say this about a white guy in rural India wearing a T-shirt, Bermudas and trainers, and it applies just as much over here. Furthermore, there is no doubt that the face veil is oppressive to women; remember this was invented in the name of religion, not even set down by the Prophet. Just think about how women have been treated by and in the name of religion throughout human history; it is only recently that Christianity (as put forward by the Church) came anywhere close to sexual equality and it’s still a long way off-even in the Church of England women can’t become bishops, whilst the Catholic church and FDL’s treatment of women is absolutely reprehensible. It’s similar in the rest of the Abrahamic religions, for instance orthodox Judaism (think about Deuteronomy) and also in Sharia law-a woman’s testimony counts for half of that of a man’s; women and children are chattels-and also worldwide religions like Hinduism (women throwing themselves on their husband’s pyres). Not only in religion; women have always, always been the underdog in human society around the world, repressed and maltreated and seen as mere assets from China to Ireland, to be used and discarded once they’re not good for cooking and housework any more. In the face of this evidence it is undeniable that the face veil is yet another facet of the repression of women, but which has managed to survive thanks to its emergence during an era in which tolerance and relativism are the political buzzwords, sadly to the detriment of sexual equality despite its supposed enforcement through law. I fully support women being able to wear whatever they want, just as I do for men, but it worries me that nowadays girls in Britain are being brought up under the impression that it’s normal for females of all ages-even young girls-to wear headscarves and even sometimes face veils, and the damage this is going to do to all the hard-won progress of the women’s cause over the past century.

  9. As a constituent of his. I can safely say that he is not a racist because he really doesn t want to speak to anybody despite their religion or colour – takes the pay rise and does nothing important for his constituents that voted him in – value for money – what a joke- doing as little as possible for as much as possiible!!! and scrimp on the extras just to reap the wonga – such a joke!!!!

  10. I’m no rasist by any means nor am I religious, though the question needs to be asked: Could UK born people go to a Country under the muslim religion and be themselves like dress the way we dress, be and act the way we do.?

    Could a western female walk down a muslim street in a short skirt and low top..?

    Could western people go and build numerous Christian, Catholic or Protestant churches all over muslim soil…?

    I have to admit I don’t care to much for this Philip Hollobone as he’s trying to bring in The national service Bill 2014, and no way is my Son going to fight for this corrupt Government in some dirty illegal war..!

    Though I have to go with him on this, these people are in the UK, follow and abide by UK law..! The security issue alone has to be top priority, as how can you confide in someone when you can’t see who your talking to?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s