Chindie Posted March 7, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted March 7, 2019 43 minutes ago, bickster said: Another one for the F***ing Pig Shit Thick MPs Conference An intelligence vacuum. Leadsom is one of those people that really has no right to be in the position she is. She's got the capability of plasterboard, and is far less useful. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 7, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted March 7, 2019 2 hours ago, tonyh29 said: she pays her husband to be her personal assistant she could send him instead I would hope that being a personal assistant to an MP - duties would be limited to parliamentary type duties, otherwise we'd be paying for all sorts - MP's manicurist, florist, shopping assistant, hairdresser...whatever. Typing up letters, arranging diaries, sorting travel tickets and all that - all good. Childcare assistant - not so much. Not a party point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 7, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted March 7, 2019 20 minutes ago, PompeyVillan said: Amber Rudd has called Dianne Abbott 'coloured'. I don't believe there was any real racist intent in it, but goodness me. I think there is an institutional issue with racism in politics and in our society, and this is a good example of it. She didn't mean to demean Dianne Abbott, but she did, which shows real ignorance. What a shame for her, she was hoping to resign as a matter of principle regarding Brexit, but it looks like she will may have to resign again in disgrace. I just heard the radio of the interview. She was defending Abbott from the sort of abuse she gets on twitter. She used a term which is now considered "verboten" and apology is right. I thought about the American "NAACP" National Association for the Advancement of Colored People which is going strong. Sure they have the "right" to choose that term for themselves, and history and so on gives good reason why. She should have said "Black people" or "people of colour", but from my white male perspective (which might be wrong) I didn't think it was a "resign in disgrace thing". There was clearly no detrimental or bigot or nasty side to it at all, just bad choice of using a now outdated term. Not a good thing for her to do, but not on the resignation scale. I wonder what Abbott, or other black people think - they should count higher than my opinion on this. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 7, 2019 Moderator Share Posted March 7, 2019 31 minutes ago, blandy said: I wonder what Abbott... think It won't add up whatever she thinks 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 Still a few hours remaining in the day for Williamson to bring up the war! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 If she made a mistake, and she's willing to learn from it, then it's not a resigning matter. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 I was being tongue in cheek, I don't expect her to resign. I also don't know how much of a faux pas it is if I am honest, but I do know it is something that I wouldn't say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 7, 2019 Moderator Share Posted March 7, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, blandy said: I just heard the radio of the interview. She was defending Abbott from the sort of abuse she gets on twitter. She used a term which is now considered "verboten" and apology is right. I thought about the American "NAACP" National Association for the Advancement of Colored People which is going strong. Sure they have the "right" to choose that term for themselves, and history and so on gives good reason why. She should have said "Black people" or "people of colour", but from my white male perspective (which might be wrong) I didn't think it was a "resign in disgrace thing". There was clearly no detrimental or bigot or nasty side to it at all, just bad choice of using a now outdated term. Not a good thing for her to do, but not on the resignation scale. I wonder what Abbott, or other black people think - they should count higher than my opinion on this. Agreed and I think Brendan Cox is spot on with this. Edited March 7, 2019 by markavfc40 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 similarities to Benedict Cumberbatch to a degree where they were trying to put across an important message about racism and then **** it up with the wrong choice of word 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 The Rudd thing really is about context isn't it. It was clearly meant in a positive way. People calling for her to have awareness training. Nah, I can't see it. More 'correct' words can be used by others in far more insulting ways. If that phrase was to be a problem for Rudd, I'd expect a public execution for the letterbox Johnson. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, blandy said: I just heard the radio of the interview. She was defending Abbott from the sort of abuse she gets on twitter. She used a term which is now considered "verboten" and apology is right. I thought about the American "NAACP" National Association for the Advancement of Colored People which is going strong. Sure they have the "right" to choose that term for themselves, and history and so on gives good reason why. She should have said "Black people" or "people of colour", but from my white male perspective (which might be wrong) I didn't think it was a "resign in disgrace thing". There was clearly no detrimental or bigot or nasty side to it at all, just bad choice of using a now outdated term. Not a good thing for her to do, but not on the resignation scale. I wonder what Abbott, or other black people think - they should count higher than my opinion on this. Predictably, Abbott is trying to extract maximum outrage from it. The moronic, detestable, hypocritical word removed. No recognition of the fact that Rudd was actually sticking up for her. It's a weird world where "coloured people" is an offensive term, but "people of colour", ie exactly the same words but in a different order with the addition of "of" is perfectly OK. Edited March 7, 2019 by Risso Insufficient criticism of Abbott 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Risso said: It's a weird world where "coloured people" is an offensive term, but "people of colour", ie exactly the same words but in a different order with the addition of "of" is perfectly OK. On a simple level it’s weird but when you add in historical context it makes more sense. Edited March 7, 2019 by LondonLax 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 The racist thing about Amber Rudd is that her department were happily deporting British citizens to foreign countries that they had either never visited or hadn't visited for decades for no good reason. If Diane Abbott hasn't been quick to get over that, then fair enough to be honest. This is a basically minor infraction, seemingly made out of poor word-choice rather than malice, and she doesn't need to resign over it, just listen and learn. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 7, 2019 Moderator Share Posted March 7, 2019 47 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: The racist thing about Amber Rudd is that her department were happily deporting British citizens to foreign countries that they had either never visited or hadn't visited for decades for no good reason. If Diane Abbott hasn't been quick to get over that, then fair enough to be honest. This is a basically minor infraction, seemingly made out of poor word-choice rather than malice, and she doesn't need to resign over it, just listen and learn. To be fair to Elmer Fudd (I'll birch myself later), she resigned for lying to parliament but it took the heat off Theresa May whose policies the Home Office were carrying out and they tried to resume the deportations only last month under Sajid Javed, who again was lying to parliament when he said that it was only serious criminals who were being deported, only for the Home Office to contradict him. May is at the heart of this and still is. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, bickster said: To be fair to Elmer Fudd (I'll birch myself later), she resigned for lying to parliament but it took the heat off Theresa May whose policies the Home Office were carrying out and they tried to resume the deportations only last month under Sajid Javed, who again was lying to parliament when he said that it was only serious criminals who were being deported, only for the Home Office to contradict him. May is at the heart of this and still is. Sure, I don't disagree with any of that. I certainly don't want to be read as excusing May for the hostile environment policy. However, Rudd was responsible for its implementation, and it was implemented in a particularly horrific way. She shares responsibility with May through the doctrine of shared cabinet responsibility, and through the common sense understanding that the person running a department is one of the people responsible for the department's operation. That she resigned specifically for lying to Parliament, rather than for the horrendous effects of the policy, is damning rather than exculpatory. The problem was not only - or even mostly - about her lack of candour to the House. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 7, 2019 Moderator Share Posted March 7, 2019 5 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Sure, I don't disagree with any of that. I certainly don't want to be read as excusing May for the hostile environment policy. However, Rudd was responsible for its implementation, and it was implemented in a particularly horrific way. She shares responsibility with May through the doctrine of shared cabinet responsibility, and through the common sense understanding that the person running a department is one of the people responsible for the department's operation. That she resigned specifically for lying to Parliament, rather than for the horrendous effects of the policy, is damning rather than exculpatory. The problem was not only - or even mostly - about her lack of candour to the House. Agreed, I wasn't quoting you as criticism, more of a jumping in point to the conversation than anything. It was also Fudd herself who suggested that companies should be forced to publish how many foreign workers they employ only for business to effectively tell her to sod off so it never came to fruition. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 7, 2019 Share Posted March 7, 2019 I see the blancmange of bigotry that is Mark Francois was on Newsnight tonight ostensibly to repeat his ERG/ERM stuff about Brexit but he was also asked to speak about what Karen Bradley said (as per the post by NV) and he said he agreed with her. He didn't qualify whether he agreed with her first statement or her correction. I inferred it was the former; I don't think I was being uncharitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 Foreign Office grants Zaghari-Ratcliffe diplomatic protection Quote The Foreign Office (FCO) has escalated its conflict with Iran over the imprisonment of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe by granting her diplomatic protection, a step that raises her case from a consular matter to the level of a dispute between the two states. The move, likely to lead to increased tensions between the two countries, came after the foreign secretary, Jeremy Hunt, judged Tehran was not meeting its human rights obligations to the British-Iranian dual national under international humanitarian law. She has been in a Tehran jail for three years, after being sentenced to five years for spying. Hunt toughened his stance amid claims that the Iranians had spurned her request for better medical treatment, including regular access to drugs and to her own doctor. Affording Zaghari-Ratcliffe diplomatic protection, a step advocated by campaign group Redress and her husband Richard for nearly two years, also means that from now on, an injury to her is viewed as an injury to the British state. “We have not been able to secure her the medical treatment she urgently needs despite the assurances to the contrary,” Hunt said. Admitting the step was “very unusual”, Hunt added: “I have not taken this decision lightly. I have considered the unacceptable treatment Nazanin has received over three years, including not just lack of access to medical treatment, but also lack of due process in proceedings brought against her”. He said the step was a signal that “Tehran’s behaviour is totally wrong”. He admitted “the measure is unlikely to be a magic wand that leads to an overnight result. But it demonstrates that Britain will not stand by when one of its citizens is treated so unjustly”. He added: “Iran was an ancient civilisation, but no government should use innocent individuals as pawns for diplomatic leverage.” ... more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 (edited) 15 hours ago, PompeyVillan said: Amber Rudd has called Dianne Abbott 'coloured'. I don't believe there was any real racist intent in it, but goodness me. I think there is an institutional issue with racism in politics and in our society, and this is a good example of it. She didn't mean to demean Dianne Abbott, but she did, which shows real ignorance. What a shame for her, she was hoping to resign as a matter of principle regarding Brexit, but it looks like she will may have to resign again in disgrace. What does she say then? You cant say black you can't brown you can't say coloured. It's beyond a joke. Black people call us white people I don't get offended by so why should this matter? Should lammy be sacked for calling celebs white people when he was talking about comic relief?? Edited March 8, 2019 by Demitri_C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts