The Party Chair has told him to apologise for his comments.
Whilst we all have opinions, does that mean we should dictate who can choose what to wear, especially depending on where they come from?
I've just got the Sky News alert about that and was about to share a link too.
And as someone who is deeply opposed to religions of all kind, and especially those which treat women so terribly, I find the burqua truly grotesque. It is an affront to every hard fought right not just for women, but for us as a species.
I doubt some light hearted Boris humour will change things, but as a free speech absolutist, he should be able to say whatever he likes about any topic. So mock away Boris, ridicule the ridiculous.
Are you against those who would dictate what people can wear?
Partially yes we should, in general no we shouldn't. It should apply to ALL face covering clothing including but not limited to motorcycle helmets, ski masks, burka; when in public places such as schools, hospitals, public transport, government buildings but not necessarily on the street, and left to the discretion of shop keepers or shopping malls. In my opinion.
Unfortunately it is the age we live in, where some people can't apply some common sense themselves and require some encouragement.
I’m against people deciding what others should wear, just because it’s different to their own choices.
I assume you’re leading up to the point that Denmark have banned full face veils. Just before you do, I’m not Danish and I don’t live in Denmark 
That’s an opinion with regards to security and I don’t disagree.I do however disagree with someone like Johnson writing pieces with childish insults just beacuse the target audience resonate with it, so he can therefore build up his own base of support, just like Trump.It’s no surprise that Johnson only met with Bannon last week then comes out with this ridiculous article.
And I agree with you, that is why I started the thread. I don't think it was necessary for him to do that at all. In fact it detracts from the good points he was making (if there were any )
No, but that was what the article was about. Even The Sun got that much. So if we leave out the line about letterboxes do you agree with the article?