Monday, October 16, 2006

In the News

The Police have far more good bloggers than any other profession. Along with many other things, I do not know why this is so.

Anyway, thanks to PC Bloggs (who writes at for pointing out the article below:

I'm sure that there will be more to this story than meets the eye (just like Shanni Naylor a few months back, who turned out not to have been quite the angel that the Press initially portrayed her as)

However if no violent incident took place; then by involving the police, the school has certainly managed to make themselves appear ridiculous. This was the same borough where a few months ago a ten year old was brought to the courts after being reported by the Headmaster for 'using racist language in the playground'

The danger with all this is that the public will start to think of teachers as pc obsessed lunatics, not to be taken seriously. We seem to be ignoring the serious stuff and obsessing about the trivia.

Here's the classroom assistant Aisha Asmi who's been sacked for being utterly incomprehensible.

When she was interviewed (by a man) for the job, she 'forgot' to wear this highly important veil. How delighted I am that my taxes will be paying for her to take the school to an Employment Tribunal.


Anonymous said...

I can never understand why schools report the most trivial incident to the Police so long as it involves anything even vaguely to do with 'racism' but when a teacher is threatened pushed or shoved, they do not.

Anonymous said...

because they're covering their arses, jo.
and because some of them actually believe this rubbish.

Anonymous said...

We had two kids the other day who had been fighting in the playground. One had made fun of the other for having ginger hair and the other one had said something racist.

Both misdemeanors would be equal in my eyes but half the staff seemed to think they were in completely different leagues. Why should one insult be different to any other?

Anonymous said...

I listened to the interview with that veiled woman on the BBC the other day. I'm still not convinced that it's not an Ali G type wind up.

Liam said...

Hi Mr Chalk,

the side bar has dropped because of the long link in the post two below (A good man)

Write up as


hit enter in the link somewhere, to split.. or see if there's an option to "wrap" the text.



BTW, great blog. :)

Anonymous said...

You can use free services like to generate a short URL to replace a very long one.

Jeff said...

Fatty, Geek, Shortass, Pizzaface, Paki, Gayboy, Ginger, Paedo, Tw@t, Lanky, Lesbo, etc.

Spot the odd one out: Paki (well done) - calling a south Asian a Paki is likely to get you arrested, even if you are a child, whereas the others are deemed *acceptable* insults (?)

Now spot the one that causes the most hurt to the victim: All of them

No offence was intended by anything written in this comment, apart from any felt by the p.c. vigilantes out there.

Anonymous said...

For years we have pandered to every ridiculous whim of the more vocal minority groups. At long last the silent majority are starting to stand up for themselves.

Anonymous said...

Basic physics; if gas (e.g. CO2) is precipitated in a solution within a sealed container (e.g. shaking up a bottle of fizzy pop) either the container will explode/rupture or, when the seal is broken, there will be a very messy accident.
In my (not so humble) opinion, the pressure of an anti-PC backlash is starting to build up. If or when it is released, there may well be an extremely messy situation.
The lunacy which is so prevalent in our public life can not be allowed to continue.
On the other hand, if things do continue in the same way much longer, kiss State Education in this country goodbye.

Anonymous said...

'When in Rome, do as the Romans' is as true as it was then. If I went to live in Pakistan or Saudi, I wouldn't run round in shorts (nor would I be allowed to probably)

So why do we worry so much about upsetting them when they come here? The reason these women wear veils is simply because their men force them to.

I suspect that if a British man started telling women to wear short skirts he would get into trouble.

Anonymous said...

You're right there has to be more to this story about the kid being arrested. Surely schools don't waste the time of the Police with stuff like this.

Im fact I'm sure that the police wouldn't turn up to an incident so trivial, would they?

Anonymous said...

Worth reading the Ofsted report for this school - it used to be called Joseph Eastham School. Interesting phrase that - 'used to be.' Locally this has received a lot of publicity.
I wonder if we've had the edited highlights of this story?

Anonymous said...

Is there a list of acceptable insults in schools these days?
Would this be published in the school for the tender children to know?

Anonymous said...

is it just me but has anyone else clicked on the second link, re the veil, and thought, 'that picture looks like one of those not very funny birthday cards' a la 'dave always liked it when suzy ate his sausage'?

Anonymous said...

This time last year, a girl with behavioural difficulties directly related to her vile personality stole my purse in school, using an ingenious plan that belied her position as bottom-most pupil in the bottom-most set.

The HT encouraged me to shop her (I would have anyway) because he wanted shot of her. When the time came for the last t to be crossed I wavered a bit because she's only Y9, life prognosis bad enough already, her mother has a bit of a temper, the usual stuff.

The copper i/c of the case said he was fed up with people saying how wet the Police are when it comes to punishing repeat young offenders when it's the likes of me that withdraws at the last moment, after all the paperwork etc has been done. Against the rules as it turns out, he showed me a list of her previous offences, one of which was to run into from behind and push over an elderly woman (she was injured) and nick her bag.

If teachers were aware of just how nasty some of the kids they resist "criminalising" are, their cardiac haemorrhages would dry right up. If crims are allowed to have a person in court to testify as to their good character, why can't we ever know their previous record?