The boy in the burka

Sun News dressed a minor in a burka and sent him to the liquor store, for some reason.

by Emma Teitel

Are you a 14-year-old boy seeking a mickey of Sambuca but you’re four foot three, absent fake ID, and your older brother refuses to break the law on your behalf? Don’t worry about it. Sun News  has got your back.

Thanks to this awesome Just for Laughs Gags segment  exposé on the evil scourge of political correctness, you will never have to go thirsty again. Just pick up a burka at the local Islamic fashion outlet, walk over to the LCBO and voila: Sambuca’s in the bag (don’t forget the chase!)

And don’t forget to tell your friends.

Not only will you be able to break the law and avoid detection, but you’ll be doing our country a great service by exposing the profound hypocrisy of institutionalized cultural sensitivity.

It doesn’t matter, of course, that no one would have conceived of  LCBO burka fraud until the  Toronto Sun invented it. All that matters is that Canadians know the truth:

Burkas = underage drinking. They are weird and dangerous. And it is our duty to try one on every once in a while and conduct a freak experiment in the name of freedom.

Thank you Sun News.

 

 

 

 




Browse

The boy in the burka

  1. 1. How slow do you have to be to not see the contradiction of a Moslem woman so observant that she wears a burka out by herself buying liquor? I think those liquor stores must be places where you could show up a dead ringer for Shirley Temple and still get served. Did the Toronto Sun and their 14 year old agent try any purchases without the burka?

    2. If it’s okay for the Toronto Sun to break the law why is it a problem for the liquor store to do the same? Are right wing crusaders somehow exempt from the laws they expect the government to follow?

    3. If the Toronto Sun had been caught in the act, would we be hearing about how their silly plan was foiled? Why should we even believe what this columnist is saying when he is so clearly inventing a story?

    • Apparently this “Menzoid” circus geek was hired by Sun News in order to make Ezra Levant feel mature and respectable. Jesus, Sun News should be given a public subsidy for keeping some of these folks from walking the streets unsupervised.

      • I agree, we should have waited for the CBC or Star to expose the LCBO as a bunch of hyper-sensitive rubes, too afraid and politically correct to tell the burka clad individual to expose her-him self————waiting……….waiting…………………….waiting.

  2. tobyornotoby nailed it. We simply haven’t been culturally sensitive enough! Hey, LCBO workers. If a burka-wearing anybody comes in, feel free to ask them to show their face, because devout Muslims don’t drink alcohol–part of the religion. If nothing else, call them out on religious hypocrisy.

    • Heck just ask for ID – if they could get convincing fake ID to go with the burka, they could get convincing fake ID to say they’re 21.

      • or 19. or even 18 in another province.

      • There’s a reasonable suggestion. Wouldn’t this also be an issue every Halloween?

        • Less of an issue – there’s a religious right to wear a burka, but not a hallowe’en mask.

          • The burka is not a religious garment and, even if it were, it deserves no more respect or accomodation than does any other superstition. In a secular society – and this is a secular society, thank God – there is no place for religious accomodation. Practice your ghost worship in your own home or in your privately owned club.

          • Take it up with the constitution. Here in Canada we let you practice your religion as you see fit unless there’s a good reason to prevent you from doing so. Although I am very nominally religious at best, I am proud of the rights we extend to my fellow citizens who wish to take advantage of them.

          • My religion demands that I smoke marijuana and slaughter my own meat. Where’s my accommodation? What you really mean is that we allow some groups to pursue their own religions and the idiocies demanded by them, while we deny that “freedom” to others. There is nothing in the constitution that demands accommodation of religious sacraments, only the freedom to believe any damn fool thing you like, (Which I support, obviously). I think you should have the right to wear a full body garbage bag if that’s what turns your crank., But I also think it’s the hyper-sensitivity of rubes like yourself that makes people so reluctant to confront religious idiocy as we see with this latest debacle.

            Wearing a burka is not a religious observance, it’s an expression of internalized misogyny. It’s a cultural abomination akin to foot-binding.

          • pretty much none of what you have written is correct. There is an excellent discussion of the matter by the Supreme Court in a case called Anselm, which I encourage every Canadian to read. Colby Cosh has also written a worthwhile piece on religious belief and marijuana possession called “R v. the Doobie Brethren” and while I think he’s reading some of the cases a little strongly, it’s worth checking out.

          • That’s about the laziest response I’ve ever seen. If you’re tired of talking about it, just stop talking about it.

          • YOu’re arguing from an incorrect premise and I’m guiding you to an authoritative source to give you the tools to help.

          • Well, that’s unspeakably decent of you. If you were interested in actually furthering the discussion you could have taken 30 seconds to post a link or – god forbid – actually quote the relevant passages which illustrate the incorrect premise, the one you assert, but can’t be bothered to demonstrate.

            Regardless, I suspect that you’ve read the cited works with the same care and consideration as is your usual, meaning that they have little if any relevance to what I wrote.

          • 34 minutes later, I am replying to my own post to confirm that not only was my premise correct, it’s proved to be correct by the very same authoritative sources that GFMD claimed would correct me. The bottom line is that the courts reserve for themselves the right to determine what beliefs are held “sincerely” and which beliefs are not. How does that work out in practice? The courts will protect your religious freedoms if you belong to a big club, but if you’re a freelance religious whacko then you’re out of luck, buck.

            Which is, more or less, exactly what I wrote above.

          • so in fact a burka gets religious accommodation right, as you said it didn’t.

          • No. What I said is that it shouldn’t be protected as a religious garment – even Islamic religious leaders do not claim it as such – which is an opinion. The question of whether or not the courts would agree with me – and with the Koran – has not been tested as far as I know. Perhaps you’ve come across a legal case where someone was denied the right to wear a Burka?

            My position, and I’ve said it from the start, is do what you like in your own home or private club so long as it doesn’t harm anyone else. From my perspective, walking around like a mobile sack of garbage can not help but be harmful to your emotional and mental health, but as long as women are choosing it freely (yeah, right!) then we have no cause to object.

            Please take care to read what is written and try hard not to leap to unfounded conclusions.

          • and then i said take it up with the constitution.

      • You don’t need fake id to go with the burka, that’s the whole point! All you need is someone else’s real id.

        • That’s true up to a point. But in the case of Sun news it would have stopped the teenager cold. And since underage people use overage people’s ID with only limited physical similarity all the time, the overall difference is minor.

          • No, they don’t use it all the time, there has to be a physical resemblance. Otherwise, what’s the point of the photo in a photo id?

          • but the resemblance can be pretty darn minor, if i recall my pre-19 and close to 19 days correctly. As in similar facial hair and four inches height difference still works!

            Frankly if someone was wearng a burka and bought alcohol and handed me an ID where the height and gender match (added bonus for middle eastern sounding name) I’d probably just let it slide. If a few teens slip through well it happens.

  3. I am amazed to find out Teitel actually reads Canadian news but not surprised that she can only write snarky comments about right wing people while ignoring policy issues or witless performance of public sector workers. Why are so many clueless and bigoted Libs hired to work in Canadian msm?

    • There’s the TonyAdams we know and love back. I was worried by your pretty sensible comment above.

    • That’s a good question. We needed a new TV network just to get anyone other than lefties on the air.

    • How many burka-clad women do you think they see buying alcohol? Perhaps it is infrequent and they were unsure what to do.

  4. “Burkas = underage drinking.”

    Selley ~ LCBO and burkas:

    In fact, the religious angle wasn’t even mentioned in the story itself. Rather, the Menzoid was trying to score a point against the LCBO’s liquor monopoly ….. And it is nevertheless intriguing, I think, that three LCBO clerks would wave through someone dressed thusly without asking any questions. Never mind their legal obligation to match the face on the ID card to the one on the customer … seems reasonable to speculate that those LCBO clerks looked at the veiled customer, realized what they ought to do, and didn’t do it for fear of winding up in their supervisor’s office, the newspaper or some kind of human rights court.

    That’s not healthy at all, and there’s no point blaming Muslim immigrants for it. In pursuing a harmonious, egalitarian, rights-conscious society, longer-established Canadians may have created a fear of making reasonable requests of fellow citizens who aren’t superficially “like” us. That drives people apart, not together.

    • It’s concerns like the hypothetical liquor store employee in your scenario that underline why it’s important for the media to talk about how law actually work rather than spreading the speculative misleading paranoia they do now (Kangaroo courts! Truth not a defence! Unconstitutional! Blah Blah Blah!)

      • It’s nothing to do with the law, people are more afraid of being labelled as racists and bigots then they are of any legal consequences. It’s the Canadian conditioning of being browbeaten all your life that “sensitivity” is the highest ideal and “intolerance” is the basest of sins.

        People take the path of least resistance, they “forget” to ask for ID to avoid an unpleasant confrontation. None of this is “news” in any sense of the word.

        • That could very well be, but Selley did mention human rights tribunals.

          • Who?

          • Chris Selley from the NP – Tony quoted him.

          • Thanks, I got it on second read through. I thought that was Tony’s own words.

          • Tony, as a rule, doesn’t post Tony’s own words.

          • Well, the human rights tribunals do like to get involved in stuff but I think it’s the idea of being labelled a thought-criminal by the usual self-righteous prigs that makes people avoid the confrontation. The tribunals are only the most extreme expression of public scolding, after all. The social pressure to conform to group think is felt long before you get to that venue.

            You’re doing it yourself, right here and now.

  5. I thought kids were supposed to pay adults to go into the liquor store for them, not the other way around! On a more serious note, I think it’s valuable to know that LCBO employees didn’t card people. Then again, it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest this could only happen at a state-owned liquor depot, which seems to be the Sun’s goal.

    • It also depends very much on the individual clerk and store, just as it would with a non-government outlet (as you can tell by the number of underage smokers you see hanging around middle schools). I know I’ve seen people carded in my local store who were to my knowledge well over 25, and I’ve seen a number of people refused when they couldn’t produce ID.
      I wouldn’t be surprised if Sun scouted out a number of stores first, to find which ones were lax about carding, before pulling the stunt.

    • No, that was not the goal. The whole rationale for banning private liquor stores is that only the state can ensure compliance with liquor laws. The Sun News stunt clearly obliterates that argument. That was the goal.

  6. The fact that Liberals and other Political Correctoids are upset is proof that the Sun did the right thing. Too many Canadians are being intimidated into accomodating the insane “burka” and it’s time this was brought out. It’s time to expose the Islamist pressure groups and their allies in the phony human rights industry for the dangers they are imposing upon Canadian society. If Islamists were anywhere close to a majority anywhere in Canada, there would be zero-tolerance for those of different faiths or no faith at all. They would impose Shariah law with brutal indifference to any Charter of Rights that Canadians might have written in the past.

    • You are a bigger danger to the way of life in this country than Islam will ever be.

      • Why? Because he has an opinion that’s different from yours? I’m not afraid of people who think differently from me, I’m afraid of people who are afraid to think but zealous in protecting what they already know.

        • Because he takes pride in bizarre antagonism towards a minority group in Canada and how we seek to give them legal protection. This is alarming in itself, but throw in Jason Kenney and his willingness to play up this crap for votes, it can be very unsettling.

          • You have a bizarre and inappropriate level of confidence in your own deductive powers. Your original assertion was that an individual, FPSC and his opinions represent a greater danger _as presently constituted_ then any possible danger from Islam now _ or at any time in the future_.

            At least when challenged, you have enough sense to start backpedalling furiously but perhaps the better course would be to refrain from such whopping stupidity in the first place.

    • You want political correctoids and “intimidation” go disagree with the majortiy view in the comments on the Sun story then come back and tell us all about tolerance.

    • So, the fact that A) a Muslim women wearing a veil never would have gone into an LCBO in the first place, and B) if she did, and was asked to remove her veil to confirm her age against a photo ID she almost certainly would have, don’t matter?

      The most frustrating thing about these “person pretending to be a Muslim woman in a veil” pranks is that they only work to demonstrate what a person PRETENDING to be a Muslim woman in a veil could get away with. When Muslim women who cover their faces are asked to remove their veil for reasonable reasons such as this, they REMOVE THEIR VEIL. What’s more, said women explain this, repeatedly, in the media every time this comes up. I’ve never seen a single story about an actual Muslim woman refusing to uncover her face in such a reasonable circumstance because it just doesn’t happen. I simply don’t understand why we’re continually debating if and how we should force women to remove their veils for ID checks given the stunning lack of evidence that any one of them has ever refused a request to remove her veil for a reasonable ID check.

    • “The fact that Liberals and other Political Correctoids are upset is proof that the Sun did the right thing”
      This is the attitude that destroys political discourse, and it happens on both the left and right. The reversion to in-group/out-group drone thinking. “The people I hate don’t like eggs? I must love eggs!” or visa versa.

    • Oh yes, the pressure to accomodate Muslim traditions is unrelenting isn’t it? And for those of you who like to add ‘oid’ to words, here’s one for you – paranoid.

  7. “no one would have conceived of LCBO burka fraud until the Toronto Sun invented it”

    I hate to know you out of your bubble Emma, but underaged kids have been inventing a million ways to get liquor for a long time. Putting on a burqa is a lot easier than creating a fake id. Fake ids (for the purpose of getting booze or getting into bars) were everywhere when I was that age. It’s also easier than asking strangers walking into the store to buy booze for you, or getting Jimmy’s older brother to help you out.

    • Well, I guess if there’s numbers of teenagers showing up in liquor stores wearing burqas we can blame Sun News. I for one, will not be holding my breath.

      • “Coming up next on our newscast: Are underage teenagers donning burquas to buy booze?”
        I for one am looking forward to it.

        • ‘The Muslimization of Canadian Youth’ – the series coming soon.

    • “Putting on a burqa is a lot easier than creating a fake id”
      Agrreed.
      “It’s also easier than asking strangers walking into the store to buy booze for you, or getting Jimmy’s older brother to help you out”
      Not even close.
      Pick a group of three underage kids. One has an older sibling, or a slightly sketchy neighbour. All it takes is a text or a cell call. Don’t even have to wait around by the door anymore.
      Whereas calling someone to ask to borrow a burka? Really?
      .

      • The sibling and the neighbour have absolutely no intention of heading down to the liquor store to be the personal servant liquor buyer of their neighbours and siblings. In fact, it’s quite clear to me that they would find it quite funny to receive such a phone call, and they would have a great time shooting down the request, and maybe even make a game out of it. “Yeah, bro, I’m on the way, just hang tight, when you called an hour ago I was saving a drowning baby. Believe me, I’ll be there any minute now.”
        Why would you call someone to borrow a burqa? Just buy one, they’re not made of gold. Stick it in your locker at school and take it with you whenever there’s a kegger.

        • This is the brain on Sun News.

  8. We think the most important question is why are the AWESOME Just For Laughs Gags mentioned in this article? Not complaining, just thanking for the free but somewhat confusing exposure!

    • Because if anybody takes this report seriously, we should be laughing at them.

  9. Sun news is the Fox news of the north. Why would anyone take anything they say seriously?

  10. The pure comedy of this is just…so awesome. 4th tier ‘news’ network gets a “Got ya” three-fer, 1) In-house, on-air, cro-mag ‘exposes supposed politically-correct, hug-a-muzlem/moslem/muslim attitudes, thereby shoring up drooling, if negligible in number, audience. 2) Take a swipe at lazy, big-brother lovin’, state-employed union thug booze dispensers, thereby righteously smiting stuff audience cited in 1) despises. And, 3) Wallow in the ‘earned media’ your moronic prank generates, thus ‘contributing to the discourse’ in a ‘dynamic, relevant way that sets the agenda!’

    Super slow clap.

  11. Maybe the person in the burka had a bomb or was a 3 foot terrorist

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *