Sangeeta Uppaladinni visited the capital on her first long trip for more than a year after her sight worsened due to a genetic condition.
She was browsing in Historical London Souvenirs, near Paddington, when she was ordered out by a staff member - leaving her “shaken” and “harassed”.And why was she ordered out?
Ms Uppaladinni, 42, said: “I was browsing for a souvenir and a man ordered me to get out of his shop, saying dogs are not allowed.
“I continued shopping because I know I have a legal right to be there with my dog, which is specially trained.
“He kept harassing me but I dug my heels in and refused to leave. He then said “blind people like you should not be in my shop.”
“He told me “You can call the police or take me to court but I’m not allowing you in.”Did she call the police? No.
“I showed him my ID and he said he did not want to read it and said “get out, now.”So she got out, despite knowing she had every right to be there...
Now, pause to consider which identity group we might be talking about here. Yup, you got it:
A worker at the shop said: “The member of staff involved has been disciplined. The shop’s owners are Muslim so there is a general policy of no dogs.
“We have a sign at the door which says guide dogs are allowed - but he did not know it was there.”Clearly, if what he said to Ms Uppaladinni is correct, he knew full well that he was out of line. He was well aware of the risk of being taken to court, he just didn’t care.
And why should he? That risk is vanishingly small, thanks to the cringing acquiescence of everyone involved!
Ms Uppaladinni said she had no plans to seek legal action but wanted to make shopkeepers aware of the fact that guide dogs should always be permitted.Oh, give me strength…
David Kent, Engagement Officer for London with the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association said: “Legally she is allowed in the shop. We campaign tirelessly to make sure this sort of thing doesn’t happen.”A bit less campaigning and shaking your head sorrowfully, and a bit more suing & referring to council’s Trading Standards teams to reinforce the message, might help, Mr Kent.
Or you can continue to whinge about it in the newspapers and let people like this know they face few consequences for their actions.
Your choice.
15 comments:
Soon every UK person, and I mean real Brits, not some joint-passport holder from the tribal lands here for the free money, will own a dog. Dog owning helps give a person companionship, affection, and assistance.
Plus, it pisses off the RoP
Worst possible nightmare for the PC police/Council. Victim and offender are ethnics. Can't deal with that one without upsetting a poor minority group, so best do nothing.
I've just watched greyhound racing on sky where one of the runners has just been bought to go run in the pakistani derby. I'm slightly confused now.
"Plus, it pisses off the RoP"
Something I'm wholeheartedly in favour of!
"Worst possible nightmare for the PC police/Council."
Well, indeed.
But the disability protesters seem to have no problem lobbying Parliament and holding up innocent commuters, so why not campaign outside a few of these shops?
What are they afraid of?
"I'm slightly confused now."
Let's hope there's no mix up and the poor beast doesn't get entered into the dog fighting that's also popular there!
"Plus, it pisses off the RoP"
Something I'm wholeheartedly in favour of!
"Worst possible nightmare for the PC police/Council."
Well, indeed.
But the disability protesters seem to have no problem lobbying Parliament and holding up innocent commuters, so why not campaign outside a few of these shops?
What are they afraid of?
"I'm slightly confused now."
Let's hope there's no mix up and the poor beast doesn't get entered into the dog fighting that's also popular there!
XX He was well aware of the risk of being taken to court, he just didn’t care.XX
This appears to be the default setting of ALL muslims, and most East Europeans, that they appear to think the law applie to everybody BUT them.
Book a German, or a Brit, or even a Swede or Dane, and they may argue that they have not broken the law. But with the above mentioned, they are quite aware they HAVE broken the law, and the screaming and shouting is all about their "god given right" to DO so.
Unless of course THEY are the victims, and then you can bet your bottom dollar, the hysterics are all about how the law should be applied to the instigator, and THEN all of a sudden, they (Complete with hysterically screaming Mother, Grandmother, Aunties, Uncles, village elders, at least one of whom, it will be irrelevantly pointed out, is disabled, was blown up by a mine in some shithole, and now has nightmares, Terminal atheletes foot, or something along those lines.) DEMAND the law to apply to them.
This is ESPECIALY the case when no actual law has been broken. "Looked at me in a funny way" will do.
DAMN I HATE writting two in a row, but this bit;
XX A bit less campaigning and shaking your head sorrowfully, and a bit more suing & referring to council’s Trading Standards teams to reinforce the message, might help, Mr Kent.XX
Funny how these are normally the same arseholes screaming for "more legistlation", then when they HAVE that in their hands, they never fucking USE it.
It is strange that Muslims and dogs seems to be such an issue in the UK. I work in a devout Muslim country, and I regularly see them feeding strays. I don't think they have dogs as pets or allow them in their homes, but they seem happy enough with working dogs - for security, hunting or racing purposes.
What are they afraid of?
Having their throats slit? A letter bomb? A howling mob in their jimjams threatening to behead them/burn down their offices?
XX Anonymous said...
It is strange that Muslims and dogs seems to be such an issue in the UK. XX
As with them wearing bin bags. Before 11/9, hardly a one was seen, 12/9, and since, you can not MOVE for them.
The same goes with all these other muslim related stories. THAT is why it is obviously a political motivation that drives them. Their hobby is just an excuse.
So protecting the Ummah trumps aggrieved status.
Ms Uppaladinni said she had no plans to seek legal action
"So protecting the Ummah trumps aggrieved status."
So it would appear!
And not FT's comment that years ago, you saw very, very few incidents like this.
* note * FT's comment, that should read...
Hm, what about private property rights?
He can be as private as he likes. IN PRIVATE.
He is offering "open house" to the public, therefore ALL public must be able to avail themselves of that right equaly.
If he does not like it, then ban ALL customers. Then he can do whatever he normally likes to do in private. He needs only to remember where the wrist support bandages are.
As to this story, I have just noticed the "victims" name; Sangeeta Uppaladinni
Hindu most probably, from the name. Now it beginns to make even MORE sense as to what this damn sand nigger was up to when he threw her out.
There is no stronger "racism", than that which exists between various nigger forms.
Post a Comment