Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 5 2012, 12:34 PM

She has not been obscene as allegedly John Terry, or Luis Suarez has, but she has, I think, exposed an opinion that makes her prejudiced. Can she do her job when some of her electorate know she thinks like that? There might be some of course who agree with what she says. What I am fairly sure about, is that if this was a white MP talking about blacks, their position would be untenable.

Posted by: JeffG Jan 5 2012, 12:35 PM

Reference?

Edit: Never mind. It's on the BBC News website.

Posted by: stewiegriffin Jan 5 2012, 01:13 PM

Yet more borderline racism from the mad Abbott. It's not the first time by a long way.

As one Tory MP has said, if a white MP said somthing similar they would have been sacked/forced to resign by now.

I don't know how she keeps getting away with it.

Posted by: Bloggo Jan 5 2012, 01:39 PM

Of course she should resign. She is a public figure who fully understands the implications of the words and phrases she uses after all she is a senior polititian and what she said is racist.

Posted by: xjay1337 Jan 5 2012, 02:01 PM

I think for someone in the public eye her comments were a bit out of hand but were those comments racist, well I don't know. A lot of things which are not racist are potrayed in the media and by those "ever so righteous" people who take every opportunity possible to get one up on an opposition of someone they don't like.

That can be extended to nearly everyone, people use every opportunity to take the words as just words without understanding the context. Every word has a capacity and people don't understand how that capacity can vary.

I'm sure the Daily Mail will report that if Diana was still alive she would be very upset by this sort of comment but personally I couldn't care whether she stayed or resigned.

Edit: Agree with Andy below.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 5 2012, 02:19 PM

What she said isn't particularly offensive, but she is demonstrating a somewhat bigoted attitude. It is made worse by her 'excuse' of being taken out of context.

Posted by: Bloggo Jan 5 2012, 02:24 PM

Spot on. In her position she should know better and I bet she would be all over it if one of the white opposition members had made a similar remark.

Posted by: Squelchy Jan 5 2012, 04:50 PM

She should resign not because she's a racist but because she's an idiot of the first order.

Posted by: spartacus Jan 5 2012, 06:57 PM

Abbot is Britain's Al Sharpton, always there to stir up any race issues and plays the race card like a bandit while living a life of wealth and privilege 99.9% of her constituents can only dream of.

She's one of the worst products of the 'race relations' industry. Lucky enough to be born at a time which has allowed her to spend her entire life benefiting from affirmative action programmes and being given the benefit of the doubt because she is female and black, despite having an IQ somewhere around that of a retarded amoeba. It's hard to imagine anyone from any community, black, white, brown, male, female, gay, straight or disabled, having been given the opportunities that she has, being more of an embarrassment to our national life.

Posted by: xjay1337 Jan 5 2012, 07:06 PM

Funny.

What is with amoeba's and message boards I use...they keep cropping up!

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 5 2012, 07:13 PM

I would have thought that after the roasting she got from Andrew Neil on BBC TV's This Week last year re her claim that "black mums were better than white mums", Ms Abbott would be more careful in her comments, especially so close to all the media coverage and related fallout re the Lawrence murder conviction. I think the timing of her latest comment is regrettable, if not sinister.

Sometimes I wonder if those who make careers out of "promoting racial harmony" actually want it to happen! Or have I answered my own question!

Posted by: On the edge Jan 5 2012, 08:47 PM

Good heavens; of course they don't, what else could they do for a living. Funny isn't it back to Adam Smith again!

Posted by: xjay1337 Jan 5 2012, 11:11 PM

Heard on Radio 1 newsbeat this evening she had resigned..

Posted by: Strafin Jan 5 2012, 11:40 PM

Nothing on their website, or anyone else's at the moment that I can find.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 5 2012, 11:51 PM

She has demonstrated to me that her attitude to whites means she is prejudiced. She shouldn't be in office. The remarks she made are mildly inflammatory and are not words one should expect from someone who apparently is working for equality.

Posted by: Penelope Jan 6 2012, 09:39 AM

John Terry makes a racist remark and get his coller felt, a black woman in a position of power makes a racist tweet and hides behind her shield of "it was taken out of context" and go'es on to lead the country (poss) where's the equality in that ? Anyone ??

Posted by: Ron Jan 6 2012, 11:34 AM

Note Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera hasn't come up with any reply!

Posted by: x2lls Jan 6 2012, 11:51 AM

Doesn't mean anything.

Posted by: x2lls Jan 6 2012, 11:52 AM

Well, that's as maybe, but the proof of the pudding will be when elections arrive.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 6 2012, 11:53 AM

Where the ethnic 'divide' will be demonstrated once again.

Posted by: Phil_D11102 Jan 6 2012, 12:03 PM

There is no disguising that this was a racist comment. If John Terry can be arrested and charged for making a racist comment, why hasn't Diane Abbott been arrested and charged.

Sorry, but if I made a comment at work that was considered racist, my feet wouldn't hit the floor on the way out the door.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 6 2012, 02:22 PM

It is made worse by her lack of contrition. She doesn't seem to think it is wrong to classify a specific section of the community as all the same. She was forced to apologise, which if you read it, is the thinnest apology you could make.

Posted by: user23 Jan 6 2012, 09:43 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/8997795/Ed-Miliband-red-faced-after-Bob-Holness-Blackbuster-Twitter-gaffe.html.

Posted by: xjay1337 Jan 6 2012, 11:34 PM

Lol that made me laugh.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 7 2012, 12:35 AM

Why is it funny?

Posted by: xjay1337 Jan 7 2012, 02:13 AM

Laughter doth not require explanation.

It's funny because it just reminded me of something I was talking with someone about earlier, and in answer to your next question, no I won't tell you what it was because I'll be thrown in jail for 40 years and 40 nights.

But on a serious point;

Is it just me or do any of these so called apologies by MPs ever come across as more than just a "have to say it to save face"... I'd rather someone not apologise and simply say they meant it, or that it was not meant viciously and people (as is so often the case) choose the worst context.. "oh i'm sorry i said blahblah, deeply inappropriate" sorry to anyone who was offended who wants tea round my house?"

All of the apologies seem shallow...not just this womans.





Well I'm sure if you said what she said you wouldn't be out the door at all.

That's not a racist comment, calling someone a n****r or a c**n or saying they should **** off back to their own country is quite different, especially in context to saying "those white folk divide and conquer".

I mean exactly HOW PC do you want this country to become?

I love joking with my black friends about how they stole the new car they are driving or about how my asian friends always eat egg fry rie...it's all taken in good humour. Obviously I wouldn't say that to a random person but it's the sort of off-the-cuff remark one may make...

It's important to be able to comment and/or joke about racism because otherwise, in 10 years we will be back to the whole slave and the master thing again.

Personally as a white person I find absolutely no offence in saying that I/we divide and conquer.

Finding humour in "dark" topics can only bright them closer to the light and while I think everyone laughs at a racist joke by someone like Frankie Boyle, who actually believes he's being serious? There is a difference between gently poking fun and being malicious and I don't really think this was malicious.

In context saying white people divide and conquer, which frankly if you look at the governments of the world and how everything is, is actually a very fair comment to make (except with Obama he is half black)



Yeah generally a tweet is sent from a Mobile device which if you've ever used one of those new fangled iPhones is VERY easy to make. I suffer from dyslexia and sometimes if I am thinking about more than what I'm going to eat for dinner I could very easily write blackbusters when I meant blockbusters. I could also end up writing cheese, or cakes, or "please mummy don't make me live in the shed anymore".

He should be thankful it wasn't in the context of ghostbusters because that would imply some very nasty goings-on!!

Posted by: NORTHENDER Jan 7 2012, 09:24 AM

Thumbs up to all of the above for me.

Posted by: user23 Jan 7 2012, 11:03 AM

I tweet quite a bit from my Android phone.

Like an iPhone it has predictive text, so I wondered how he managed to type "Blackbusters".

Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 7 2012, 11:18 AM

Perhaps he is a bad speller?

The Milliband issue is a diversion.

Ms Abbott is a 'professional' politician and mouthpiece. No such thing as bad publicity. Her 'personal recognition' score will have increased massively this week and she sees that as profit.
(IMHO)

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 7 2012, 11:23 AM

Sorry, but that is a feeble reply. I'd like to know what you found funny about Ron's rather spiteful post. OK, you have no obligation to me to do so, but it makes you party to the same view.

My view on Ms Abbott, isn't about making a racist remark, or being racist, it that she is on the front bench of the Labour Party. She clearly holds values and opinions that are not consistent with the party. On top of that, remarks like that only 'help' fuel social dis-harmony. This is made worse because she clearly isn't sorry. She need not be sorry, but she should consider her position.

We are paying for this apparent racist to hold office.

Posted by: Strafin Jan 7 2012, 11:47 AM

^^ Something we agree on! ^^

Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 7 2012, 11:51 AM

Can you imagine the fuss she would make if dismissed? Uncle Ed needs no such bovver and will follow expediency. Ms Abbott, if I remember, has previous for having the party toe her line.....

Posted by: Weavers Walk Jan 7 2012, 01:38 PM

She has. She said the Iraq war was illegal and voted against it. Apparently Blair was less than amused.

Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 7 2012, 03:45 PM

I didn't say she was always wrong....

Posted by: x2lls Jan 7 2012, 11:13 PM

Could it be that she has valid views, but hasn't got a clue as to how to get them across?

Posted by: On the edge Jan 8 2012, 08:28 AM

You are probably pretty much there. One of those situations where the much maligned media studies courses would hep her enormously.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 8 2012, 09:55 AM

That's what politicians are meant to be able to do.

Posted by: x2lls Jan 8 2012, 10:01 AM

Racism will never be stopped, it can not be legislated out. You can make 'em change their words, but you will never change their thoughts. At least, there is now open debate. BTW, I've searched for this on BBC, found nowt. Daily Mail however, different story. In fact another accusation re cabbies!

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 8 2012, 10:15 AM

That isn't my point. She shouldn't change her words, just her job.

Posted by: Roost Jan 8 2012, 05:06 PM

Just read Rod Liddle's comment on this in the Times.

I concur, for once he makes sense!!

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 8 2012, 05:21 PM

Agree, in general he has a good take on it!

Rgds

Posted by: Squelchy Jan 8 2012, 06:33 PM

Ah yes, Rod Liddle, he's the man:

The presenter of "Immigration Is A Time Bomb"

In November 2009, for The Spectator website, he offered "a quick update on what the Muslim savages are up to."

In December 2009, on his Spectator blog, Liddle referred to two black music producers, Brandon Jolie and Kingsley Ogundele, who had plotted to kill Jolie's 15-year-old pregnant girlfriend, as "human filth" and said the incident was not an anomaly. He continued:

"The overwhelming majority of street crime, knife crime, gun crime, robbery and crimes of sexual violence in London is carried out by young men from the African-Caribbean community. Of course, in return, we have rap music, goat curry and a far more vibrant and diverse understanding of cultures which were once alien to us. For which, many thanks."

When he was accused of racism, Liddle said he was instead engaging in a debate about multiculturalism. In March 2010 the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) upheld a complaint against Liddle, who became the first journalist to be censured over the contents of a blog, because he had not been able to prove his claim about the crime statistics. After the publication of London crime figures in June 2010, The Sunday Telegraph suggested Liddle was largely right on some of his claims, but that he was probably wrong on his claims about knife crimes and violent sex crimes.

In January 2010, the Mail on Sunday and The Observer drew attention to allegedly racist and misogynist comments posted under the username "monkeymfc"—a name Liddle has used—on Millwall Online, a fan club web forum with no official connection to the Millwall Football Club. Liddle at first attributed some of the comments to opposition fans logging in under his name to embarrass him. He later admitted he had written some of the posts that were being criticized, including one in support of the BNP excluding Black and Asian people from the party. Another post, in which he joked about not being able to smoke at Auschwitz, led to his being forced to apologise in The Jewish Chronicle.

In 2004 Liddle then 44 moved in with Alicia Monckton, a 22-year-old receptionist at The Spectator. It transpired that he had cut his honeymoon with new wife Rachel Royce short so that he could be with Monckton. On 5 May 2005, he was arrested for common assault against Monckton, who was 20 weeks pregnant at the time. He admitted the offence and accepted a police caution.

Then three days after the start of the Stephen Lawrence trial the Spectator published an article by Liddle which apparently had the potential to undermine it, and Liddle may yet face trial for Contempt of Court.

It is a matter of public record that the piece was considered problematic enough for trial judge Justice Treacy to interrupt proceedings on 7 November in order to ask the jurors whether or not they had read it. When they said they had not, he ordered them to avoid it and referred the matter to Attorney General Dominic Grieve. The issue is currently being considered by the Director of Public Prosecutions.

So, Liddle seems exactly like the type of bloke most of us would cross the road to try and avoid. Unless of course, he panders to ones own prejudices, thus seeming to validate them, in which case doubtless he'll be 'spot on'.
You pays yer money and you takes yer choice.

Posted by: Roost Jan 8 2012, 07:29 PM

Nicely put o Squelchy one.

However, as I originally said

"for once he makes sense".

Nowhere did I suggest that I agreed with him, his politics or even his existence.

Just suggested that he appeared to have a good take on this one particular subject.

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 8 2012, 07:31 PM

Not really. I can choose whether or not to buy The Sunday Times; I am compelled by law to pay my BBC licence fee - Auntie sacked Mr Liddle but still employs Ms Abbott

Both Mr Liddle and Ms Abbott are members of the same political party and therefore must (at least financially) support the same cause?

You mention Mr Liddle's marital and relationship problems, thank you. This is obvioulsy relevant. Can you help us with knowing about Ms Abbott and her family problems?

Rod Liddle gave me a chuckle this morning, his take on the subject was amusing and I wonder if you understood what he was really saying before "cutting 'n pasting" your material. Thanks.

Posted by: x2lls Jan 8 2012, 08:27 PM

Is there a link?

Posted by: Squelchy Jan 8 2012, 08:41 PM

"You pays yer money and you takes yer choice"

Only if someone's forcing you to have a broadcast receiver.

Interesting how defensive some people quickly become. (Just an observation, present company excepted of course)

Posted by: Strafin Jan 8 2012, 08:45 PM

Sadly not as the times charge £2 to read an article, or £2 to read one article.

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 8 2012, 09:33 PM

Interesting how defensive some people quickly become.

Squelchy, I agree.

I also thought your (long) post very defensive. Mr Liddle does not please you, I see. Is there any dirt on Ms Abbott you can find and likewise post on here?

Posted by: Rusty Bullet Jan 9 2012, 01:35 AM

I didn't find it defensive. I found it helpful. You can only judge a horse by the races it's run after all. None of this struck me as being 'dirt' on Mr Liddle just a bit of background to where he's coming from.

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 9 2012, 05:11 AM

...in saying that Diane Abbott had a (sort of) point in some of what she said, was a good black role model and one of the few principled politicians of the left?!

(in the article Roost refers to, Liddle does not simply attack Abbott as some seem, or wish, to think. He makes an observation of the PC mess we now have for a society and sees the irony in an unfortunate situation).

Posted by: Bloggo Jan 9 2012, 08:49 AM

Principled? Can you say that about a person who encourages her constituents to send their children to the local comprehensive and then sends her own to private school to avoid them falling in with the wrong sort.
It may have been the right decision, but principled?

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 9 2012, 09:03 AM

Completely take your point. I agree Abbott is a hypocrite. Maybe Liddle has no problem with this!

Posted by: Bloggo Jan 9 2012, 09:44 AM

Quite and given her history of inflamatory predudiced statements ("black mothers being better than white ones") and this particular offensive remark I believe this arrogant, egotistical person should have been asked to resign. People who make their living in the public domain should know how to conduct themselves.

Posted by: FactFile Jan 9 2012, 10:34 AM

Interesting quote from the Daily Mail two days ago (which seems to be almost 'The Bible' for the more eye-swiveling posters on here).

‘Divide and rule’ was a central strategy of British imperial policy, under which different ethnic groups – including those in Ghana – were encouraged to use up their energies fighting among themselves, rather than plotting to overthrow their colonial masters.


So had she used the word(s) 'British Imperial' or 'colonial masters' she'd have been ok.

and 'Bloggo'? since you claim she used that 'white v black mums' statement, perhaps you could link us to the actual quote itself that you claim she used? You know, just for accuracy's sake. Rather than something Andrew Neil said.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 9 2012, 11:48 AM

"West Indian mums will go to the wall for their children."
http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16143154

When she was asked to clarify, she refused.

Posted by: FactFile Jan 9 2012, 12:54 PM

Yes. we know that one thank you.

But Bloggo actually quoted "black mothers being better than white ones" (his quote marks) and he / she said that was a "particular offensive remark".

However, you and I both know Abbott never actually used that phrase. So for Bloggo to actually quote it and then say it's offensive is bizarre. I just wanted to give him / her a chance to back up their quote and not look silly.

It's one of those things where people's unconscious prejudices bubble up isn't it? People are automatically confusing 'West Indian' with 'Black' which is not necessarily the case. There are many white people living in the Windies, second or third generation in some cases, who seem to have been forgotten. Plus, in the race to condemn it seems to have been overlooked that she never said Whites aren't good mothers.

Didn't someone suggest that this forum needed more 'balance' and 'accuracy'?

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 9 2012, 02:04 PM

I have no doubt what Ms Abbott meant. She had an opportunity to clarify, but refused to discuss it. I have no problem with what she says, but only that she has these views and holds political office.

Posted by: Bloggo Jan 9 2012, 02:31 PM

You're quite right in the Abbott did not actually make that statement and it was Neil who suggested it to her. So I was wrong.
However she declined to deny the meaning of what was put to her when confronted with it which for someone in her position was, in my opinion, a mistake and suggested that she was in agreement with it.

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 9 2012, 03:06 PM

Perhaps you can explain what you mean by The Daily Mail being the Bible for "eye-swiveling" posters on here? Was it not The Daily Mail that did more than any other newspaper to keep the pressure on over the Lawrence murder - eventually resulting in the succesful recent conviction of two racist killers?

Posted by: x2lls Jan 9 2012, 04:43 PM

Good point
Unfortunately, there are too many that suffer from media snobbery. I fail to see how a quote from a newspaper actually defines your whole perspective.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jan 9 2012, 04:44 PM

Diane Abbot sends her kids to a £4350 per term school.
Nice work if you can get it.

Posted by: On the edge Jan 9 2012, 04:47 PM

All goes to show all publicity is good publicity! She certainly knows how to make an impact.

Posted by: xjay1337 Jan 9 2012, 10:07 PM

Well you know only private school children are ever successful.......

Posted by: blackdog Jan 10 2012, 12:07 PM

Can't she afford a top school then? £4350 is below the average for a fee paying school.

Posted by: Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera Jan 10 2012, 12:16 PM

My silence merely means that I have been away enjoying the Gower scenery, nothing more.

This is a 'storm in a tea cup', and I am sure will form part of a chapter in Diane Abbott's autobiography.

From a historical and political perspective, and given the background of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry and recent convictions, Diane Abbott did not saying anything wrong, but it was extremely daft.

It should be remembered that the 'establishment' has throughout history operated the policy of 'divide and rule', not only with regard to race issues, but across the entire social spectrum. Sadly as human beings, we are at times easily bought off with trinkets.

Ms Abbott is certainly not my 'cup of tea', but this is only because she is politically shallow in my opinion, and a self publicist, but there again those involved in politics at her level generally are.

Posted by: Squelchy Jan 10 2012, 12:32 PM

Here we go again.

Diane Abbot has 'kids' does she? Wrong.

She sends them to a £4350 p.t. school does she? Well, for a start she's only got one. So that's wrong.

If she sent her son to the school in 2003 when he was 12, he must be about 21. So somewhat unlikely to be there now. So that's wrong.

The fees the school are now charging are £13,050p.a. and they were less when the son was there. So you're wrong again.

So, your statement that "Diane Abbot sends her kids to a £4350 per term school" is wrong in every single conceivable detail.


In May 2010, she was re-elected in her constituency of Hackney North and Stoke Newington, with a doubled majority on an increased turn-out. Why not leave it to the voters to decide?

Abbott may well be an idiot, but she's their idiot. and it's up to them what they do with her.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 10 2012, 12:42 PM

I would expect anyone from the 3 main parties who displays racist tendencies to be censured, and possibly expelled from the front bench.

It was revealed in 2010 that she had in 2003 sent her son to the City of London School who charged £10,000 a-year, despite her party’s opposition to private education. It isn't the cost, but the principle that is an issue, it is good enough for her, but not anyone else if she was in power.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3229453.stm

Posted by: Squelchy Jan 10 2012, 01:09 PM

For strict accuracy, it was actually revealed in 2003

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3229453.stm

Other than that, I don't disagree with you.

But she gets elected, so it's up to her electorate. They knew about the schooling situation last year, yet felt able to re-elect her, with an increased majority. They obviously feel she's doing a good job and represents their interests.

She's an idiot, not for her remarks per se, but because she's enabled all the small-minded closet racists to run around in the daylight posting half truths and untruths all over the place.

Using the wrong words when discussing race ('white' instead of 'British Imperial') late at night on twitter is almost as bad as someone making fun of the disabled in the house of Commons. But who'd do a thing like that Mr Cameron?

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jan 10 2012, 01:18 PM

My facts were wrong yes. You sometimes cannot trust the press! However, for such a principled 'leftie' it still smacks of hypocrisy. Anyway ANYONE who dares criticise her must by nature be a racist. That's the way this country is now. Is it cos I is white?

Posted by: Squelchy Jan 10 2012, 01:22 PM

Then why post ? Better to check first.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jan 10 2012, 01:40 PM

Because I don't have time to research everything I read!!!

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 10 2012, 02:04 PM

Taking that to its natural conclusion, she presides over district full of racists perhaps?


She is someone who herself seems stuck in the dark-ages, and when exposed, resorts to what I see as lying. I don't buy that Imperialist argument for one second.


What Cameron said was in bad taste, and is language not becoming of a PM, but I think what Ms Abbott said reveals a more insidious side.

Posted by: Squelchy Jan 10 2012, 04:36 PM

All of which may or not be true. My point is that if people are going to castigate or lambast her then they have to do it in a sensible truthful manner and not just keep making up quotes that suit themselves and have no basis in fact.

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 10 2012, 05:34 PM

So being sensible, truthful and reliant on facts in this discussion would also prevent you accusing others of being "small-minded closet racists" as you did earlier in Post #68?

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 10 2012, 05:54 PM

I'd say TDAH's 'school quote' was based on fact; it was just embellished, or exaggerated.

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 10 2012, 06:17 PM

That's a very weak point.

In some constituencies, a cat could stand for election and as long as it had the correct coloured rosette around its neck and droned on about the right topics, it would get elected! That goes for all the major parties under the current system.

In the 2010 election, Abbott got 55% of a 62% registered turnout. The level of her support compared to the whole local population is small.

Posted by: Nothing Much Jan 10 2012, 06:21 PM

Diane Abbott is a close by MP. She made a comment that British Imperialism was set up on "Divide and Rule".
She has a point but was it not pragmatism? Why ask the group that hates you to help govern a country.?

As far as I know most North African Nations helped/favoured the Axis in WW2 to get rid of Italians ,French,Spanish.
and the English in Egypt.That was their pragmatic approach to their problem.

After WW1 The UK mandate was Mesopotamia. They chose Assyrians to help maintain order.
A sort of Christian bunch, with many different types. I thought they were all in the British Museum.
The Assyrian Levies helped a handful of UK Officers and citizens to try and keep various different groups from slaughtering each other.
They landed by parachute in the Balkans to help mop up.. And then in the streetfight in the Greek Civil war 46/47.
When the English left in 1955 the Kurds almost wiped them out.

I know this because of the internet. I posted the old family cine films. I have been in contact with the chap who took on
my fathers job, his daughter is a chat show host in California. Some things move on.

The English were not exactly Angels, but they took on the best available help. Not really divide and rule.
Here endeth the first.........

Posted by: Ron Jan 10 2012, 07:59 PM

Squelchy said:
'The fees the school are now charging are £13,050p.a. and they were less when the son was there. So you're wrong again.

So, your statement that "Diane Abbot sends her kids to a £4350 per term school" is wrong in every single conceivable detail.'

I would ask what the difference is between 3 terms at £4350 per term and £13050 per annum?

Posted by: Squelchy Jan 10 2012, 08:16 PM

You ask away.

First of all, it depends on how many terms they have. Other than that, the difference is none. Except that if you think about it, if it is £13050 NOW, then it wasn't £13.050 THEN. So she could not have sent him at £13050 could she? In fact it was £10,000 p.a. when she sent him.

Answer your question?

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 10 2012, 08:41 PM

So when Diane Abbott sent her kid to a private school, the fees were exactly £10,000 a year? Seems a conveniently round number, but then again, I am most likely a closet racist for daring to question a point from you. Please provide link/evidence to prove.

Thanks

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 10 2012, 09:07 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3229453.stm

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 10 2012, 09:21 PM

Thanks, but you post a link to a 2003 page. I am not with you. Sorry.

I was hoping for direct knowledge, not a rounded figure in a news story.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 10 2012, 10:13 PM

You asked for proof of the £10k, did you not? Well I'd say that this is close enough. I'm sorry I don't have the original invoice!

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 10 2012, 10:21 PM

Keep taking the tablets. All the best.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 10 2012, 10:36 PM

Perhaps you might be a little more lucid with your posts. You are causing confusion, and it seems more people than than I have noticed it.

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 10 2012, 10:49 PM

Again, I apologise for causing any confusion. I hope one day to be more lucid than than you.

Take care.

x

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 10 2012, 11:01 PM

Perhaps you have had too much Rosé, luv, or posting in bed again?

It is one thing my making a typo, but another posting irrational arguments.

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 10 2012, 11:12 PM

What a sexist pig you are Andy! I do enjoy a glass of wine after my chemo - sorry if that offends you - it is one of my few pleasures in life and my son bought me an iPad. I also have a laptop but it is difficult to use when in bed as my bones ache so much when my blood count is low.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 10 2012, 11:38 PM

I can assure you I know how you feel, but I resent you playing that one on me in this manner!

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 10 2012, 11:46 PM

Go to bed, Andy. Take care. x

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 11 2012, 12:31 AM

Under the circumstances, I don't think a debate with you now is in anyone's interest, but I do wish you all the best in your therapy.

Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 11 2012, 05:21 AM

Back to business.......

If you scroll down to the 'controversies' bit, and look at the references there is some 'evidence' as to the conduct and details.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_Abbott

I don't always recommend the source, but the information trail seems sound in this case.

Posted by: Rusty Bullet Jan 11 2012, 08:31 AM

If you have a problem with the info provided by the BBC then you really should take it up with them in the first instance.

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 11 2012, 08:31 AM

A debate? I will remind you of your comment:



Back on topic..

Posted by: massifheed Jan 11 2012, 09:13 AM

Agreed.

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 11 2012, 09:35 AM

I am assuming I am allowed to post this? This is the column from the ST last weekend written by Rod Liddle:

"Poor old Diane Abbott: never has a petard hoist someone so high, or to such jubilation. I wonder who will be next to be accused of racism? The Archbishop of Canterbury? Nelson Mandela?

Don’t forget we now have another crime apparently on the statute books — secondary racism, which involves standing next to someone who is being racist and inhaling. Kenny Dalglish, Liverpool football club and probably most of Merseyside are accused of this, for not condemning their footballer Luis Suarez for having said the word “negro” to a black player. That one, believe me, will run and run.

But back to Abbott. She has been forced to apologise for having said in a tweet that “white people love playing ‘divide and rule’. We should not play their game.” Shockin’. Bang her up. I mean, as it happens, she’s right about me, as a white person — I actually do love playing divide and rule. When I’ve finished work I can usually be found in a shed at the bottom of the garden smoking a cigarette and playing divide and rule. But that’s just me. Is it true of all white people? Is it true of, say, Ed Miliband?

He doesn’t think so and, in a rare moment of decisiveness, insisted she make one of those terribly familiar grovelling apologies which, more than anything, have come to typify our times. The not-really-meant apology.

Of course, when placed in context, Abbott’s comments are entirely explicable and harmless. She had been having an online discussion about the Stephen Lawrence court case and racism in general with a chap [woman, actually] called Bim Adewunmi (who was making some very sensible points). In other words, she was grandstanding to a largely black and leftwing audience.

That’s fair enough. And what she said — about white people loving to divide and rule — has an element of truth about it, if you clamber backwards to colonial times.

But Twitter does not give you the time and space to issue qualifiers, caveats, historical context and what have you. It demands a muscular brevity: it is not a statement to the House of Commons. And within that context, what she said seemed to me to be understandable and fair comment. Ripped away from that context, though, it’s — altogether now ! — raaaaccccist.

She has form, of course, Abbott. She is at least a two-time racist, a multiple racist. She once intimated that black mothers would do more for their kids than white mothers, which provoked howls of outrage, largely from white mothers.

But again, she had a point. If she had added the observation “because black fathers are nowhere to be seen”, it would have been doubly racist, but also doubly true in an off-the-cuff, stereotypical sort of way. A high-ish proportion of black mums are forced to rear their children alone, and do an astonishingly good job of it; that’s what she meant. Not all black mums are great mothers, not all black dads are absent; it’s a generalisation. And the truth is that we see the world through generalisations.

But it does not matter that in both cases she had a point and that her comments were taken out of context in a most egregious manner. Because Abbott would be first out of the blocks to condemn a white person for having made similarly stereotypical observations about black people. She would not give a monkey’s about either the context or the veracity; nuance does not matter to the likes of Abbott.

And the fury she unleashed online and, I suspect, within the hearts of a lot of white British people is not a consequence of what she actually said, but the consequence instead of this hair-trigger sensitivity when white people make the same sorts of generalisations, and are pilloried and sacked for it.

She is an odd case, Abbott. I cannot think, offhand, of many better black British role models and, despite her epic self-regard, she has been one of the few principled politicians of the left in recent years. That she is now being beaten about the head with an anti-racist cudgel is a shame, all the more so for having helped to fashion the cudgel herself."

Posted by: xjay1337 Jan 11 2012, 10:17 AM

Rod Liddle, what a good guy.

Posted by: NORTHENDER Jan 11 2012, 10:29 AM

Seconded

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 11 2012, 10:39 AM

I have sent you a private message.

Posted by: JeffG Jan 11 2012, 11:11 AM

Just catching up - there seem a larger than usual number of posts!

But... how would helping the Axis in WW2 get rid of Italians?

Posted by: Vodabury Jan 13 2012, 02:21 PM

Thanks, glad it is cleared up and hope you got my reply.

I acknowledge I made a couple of pointless and unhelpful posts above, I clearly was not thinking straight and I am happy to apologise to all on the thread.

Rgds

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 13 2012, 03:16 PM

Thank you for that; I did get your reply, although I failed to respond. I feel you do not need to apologise to me, albeit welcome anyway. Indeed, I'm sorry I made you angry in the first place and am pleased we can move on.

Posted by: xjay1337 Jan 13 2012, 04:08 PM

Another outbreak of Herpes?

I think it's good when people who fell out can become friends once again. Life is too short to anger those on public messageboards.

Posted by: Nothing Much Jan 14 2012, 07:44 PM

In reply to JeffG


But... how would helping the Axis in WW2 get rid of Italians?

I knew I was skating on thin ice there,but hoped nobody would notice.
Libya back then was just dates and beaches. Probably both if you were Italian.

So the answer is that the Italian colonists,especially their forces were not the greatest.
The Germans might go away after helping out their defeated allies. Hey Presto.
Everyone goes home. The Germans had bigger plans towards the east.

No oil or gas was discovered until 1960s. As a child I spent my holidays at Benghazi.
Quite fun.... even a cinema.

Posted by: gel Jan 15 2012, 08:53 AM

Abbot continues displaying same inherent racism:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2086722/Work-white-Conservative-What-Abbott-told-Tory-voting-graduate-asked-job.html

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 15 2012, 10:14 AM

Judging her by her quotes, there is little doubt Ms Abbott is a racist. The Labour Party need to ask themselves if that it is a good thing for her to remain a front bench MP. It seems, meanwhile; that is is less offensive for a black to be racist, than a white.

Posted by: gel Jan 15 2012, 12:25 PM

Absolutely right, and is very much seen as a one way street by the do gooders/stirrers and if non whites do do it, it's still society's fault

Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 15 2012, 12:38 PM

Racist, or exceptionally bitter?

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 15 2012, 01:20 PM

I think they can mean more or less the same thing.

Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 15 2012, 02:21 PM

I see your angle, but isn't Racism about how you feel about other peole whereas bitterness can come from how you feel about yourself?

Posted by: Ron Jan 15 2012, 02:46 PM

As I have said on here before, it is only whites that are racist, or that is the impression created in the UK. Go into Asia/Africa and see how different it is!

Posted by: Strafin Jan 15 2012, 04:22 PM

No. Racism is defined legally and has very little to do with your own feelings.

Posted by: xjay1337 Jan 15 2012, 06:15 PM

To me this seems nothing more than a desperate attempt on Ms Knight's behalf to get some sort of media coverage. We do not need her life story, I couldn't care if she was British born or born from the womb of a hairy Camel in the Sahara Desert (that sort of has two possible meanings)

Giving her tall tale about working for the poor children in America, wow, how mighty decent of you. Come and work for me!?

I once shaved a Sheep so it didn't get hot in the summer, do I get to complain about someone who rubbed me up the wrong way on the Daily Mail website? Quite well known actually for being completely honest and true in their reporting of "important facts" - most of which either involve a celebrity on a night out, fox hunting or Princess Diana. It's basically a woman's fashion magazine but for 30p.

I have the very distinct feeling if Ms Abbot had said all of that and then at the end said "yes, come work for me" this "story" would have never come out.

It's not really racist but hey, any excuse for a good old moan. No wonder you can't say Ba-ba-black-sheep...it's racist!!?

Posted by: Nothing Much Jan 15 2012, 06:51 PM

During the spring of last year I hosted a nephew from the other branch of family.
He was doing unpaid 3 months internship for Dodds. Parliamentary Journalism.
No job came up sadly. He did explore Westminster and came across a regular
political chap winding up after an interview. He approached much as Ms Knight did.

The "talking head" gave him a few minutes and a card. His own. "Call if you need advice."
He's too shy to take that offer up. But it shows there are people who wish to help.
ce

Posted by: On the edge Jan 15 2012, 07:34 PM

It might not be too late to put in a call Nothing Much. I know someone with a very good job - who did just that. Was shy, someone offered to help if he called. He did but only out of desperation. By that time, the chap who'd made the offer had actually retired, but said he felt flattered that the youngster had remembered him! He made a couple of calls, and my friend never looked back.

Posted by: Nothing Much Jan 15 2012, 07:59 PM

Thanks for that. I will certainly suggest a glass of malt before the phone call.
He is family based in Yorkshire and has been hoping for an opening at Salford BBC.
Westminster is the best though.
Nothing Much.

Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 15 2012, 08:13 PM

Is it? Well blow me, I never knew......

They'll be making it an offence next