[Crimson Dynamo]

Good to see you both reading the excellent Spectator articles.

[GiRTh]

Thank you for posting. If you didn't post this tosh, I'd never read it.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by arista

Maybe


But that Nasty 83 year old
went on for too long.
She was Stupid.

I don't agree with the nasty bit as to her but it's clear the Palace accept she was wrong, for them to both comment and let her leave her post.
Plus for Prince William to condemn it too.

They'll know the fuller facts to have concluded they needed just to comment even.

She likely wasn't intentionally being racist but her questioning I agree with you, got to a grossly inappropriate point.
No need for it at all.

[rusticgal]

So this lady runs a charity to help African victims of abuse is that right?

[arista]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

No she would never watch Sky TV so they would not be appealing, perhaps she could go on The BBC with Fiona Bruce or Lorraine asking gentle questions and getting to know her?

No that is not true


SkyNewsHD

or ITV1HD News

or Ch4HDnews (run but ITV news)

or Ch5HDnews (run by ITVnews)

or GBnewsHD studio in Paddington.



Sod the BBC
they get confused

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

So this lady runs a charity to help African victims of abuse is that right?

Yes

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Yes

So if a white woman wants their help they will be denied because of the colour of their skin…
Is that not the epitome of Racism?…

[thesheriff443]

60 years of loyal service and a woman’s reputation ruined for having one conversation

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Why must she have had a tape recorder on her? I'm sure if she wanted to record the conversation she could have just used her phone lol. Doesn't have to have been as pre-planned as taking a tape recorder.

Meh, semantics. How many (older) people say they're going to "tape" something when using the telly box? It's obvious what he meant, and he's old.

Originally Posted by arista

Maybe


But that Nasty 83 year old
went on for too long.
She was Stupid.

Lady SH probably thought the woman didn't understand what she was being asked or something.

[Swan]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Absolutely I can agree. I'm not sure this incident was purposefully racist. I do think however, that it was a racist conversation. As Dave (the rapper) said "it is racist, whether or not it feels racist."

I think she is of an age, and from an era and class that would put her squarely in the white supremacy mix. That doesn't mean she had a skinhead and was marching with neo nazi's. It just means that it was accepted and normal in her circles so likely to permeate subconsciously.

I'm sure not one cracker in these threads would feel happy with any stranger at a party coming up to them, messing with their hair, and repeating the same things over and over at them, in a slightly different way each time, and that's without the life experiences of the complainant thrown in. Most black people in their 30's/40's will tell you they were racially abused as children at some point. So many complicated issues at play.

I don't think 2 sides are the same here, because one side is telling a potential victim how they should act when being racially abused, how she has an agenda, what constitutes an interrogation eyc, and the other side is simply saying this is a bit nuts, none of you know what it's like.

I'll also make one final point to you, as I know we've discussed it before. Lady Haha has been allowed to drift off back to her life without any issues, no one has tried to track her down or gone for her, she resigned and has peace.

The same free speech warriors, anti-woke cancel culturists, have done nothing but attack the victim for 2 days straight. farage and Wooton doing shows about her, Galahads on twitter trying to track down her tax information etc. That's cancel culture, not a couple of dweebs on twitter threatening to stop eating at Gordon Ramsey's restaurant if he has foie gras on the menu.

I understand what you're saying. I guess the problem is, is there always has to be sides. Im not either side in this case. Yes, both these women have their side of the story, but i honestly think it'll be better if they just came together in private and talked it out. So there could be some understanding. I do certainly agree that a wealthy 83 year upper class white woman has lived a different life to us regulars on the front line. Im sure she feels a superiority to most people, no matter race. But it's just an opinion, i have no idea what either women are really like. Like i said, i feel she was just clumsy. That doesn't mean i care, doesn't mean i feel sorry for her. You know my stance on class, and royals. I feel more for the little old dears who have done right all their lives, been good people, and now can't afford to heat their homes. This woman doesn't know hardship, not in the general sense...

Assumption is the "guilty" party here. But that can, and should be explored. If, you see a black woman, wearing her African gear, a high up in a charity for African woman, and with her name, it's not wrongto assume she's African herself. Her Grandparents were most likely born in Africa, i apologise if im wrong about that!

I don't think it's racist to assume, in most cases anyway. It's kinda like, if you see a white Chav from Landan dressed in his trackies and Burberry hat, and you ask him where he's from, and he says "im from Uganda mate innit" you'd be like "hmm ok, but where are your parents/grandparents originally from" would you be deemed racist?

I think, this white woman pushed too much, not because of race, but because of class superiority. More of a "i asked you a question and you will answer me" situation. I bet, had a rich Arab been there, this white woman wouldn't of quizzed them in any form, or a wealthy black African at that.

To conclude, im not gonna scream racism in this case, it was probably more to do with class and social standing, in which this white woman felt the charity worker woman was beneath her.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Meh, semantics. How many (older) people say they're going to "tape" something when using the telly box? It's obvious what he meant, and he's old.



Lady SH probably thought the woman didn't understand what she was being asked or something.

I don't agree. Him implying she took a tape recorder means that an interaction of this nature was pre-planned. Whereas using the record function on a phone you have on you doesn't. He works in the media, he's no doddering old fool who doesn't understand technology. He's trying to force intent

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

I don't agree. Him implying she took a tape recorder means that an interaction of this nature was pre-planned. Whereas using the record function on a phone you have on you doesn't. He works in the media, he's no doddering old fool who doesn't understand technology. He's trying to force intent

No one uses a Tape recorder these days…he was simply implying she recorded it and in this day and age it’s pretty obvious he is referring to recording it on her phone….

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

I don't agree. Him implying she took a tape recorder means that an interaction of this nature was pre-planned. Whereas using the record function on a phone you have on you doesn't. He works in the media, he's no doddering old fool who doesn't understand technology. He's trying to force intent

so are you saying that she deliberately recorded a chit chat conversation?

why?

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

No one uses a Tape recorder these days…he was simply implying she recorded it and in this day and age it’s pretty obvious he is referring to recording it on her phone….

Then why say she had a tape recorder on her and therefore she pre-planned it? They were his words. I hazard that 95% of the people there had phones with recording capabilities. They had not taken them with intent....so why had this women?

There is actually no evidence that is was recorded, the "transcript" only has been released and from what I can gather that is Ngozi's recollection of the conversation. I would hazard if there was a recording it would be out there now. He's pushing a taped conversation that no-one knows exists as proof of intent to cause this row. It's lazy journalism and baiting

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

so are you saying that she deliberately recorded a chit chat conversation?

why?

Again, no proof that it was recorded but it takes less than a second to hit record....maybe she was recording the whole affair for prosperity, maybe she hit record when the conversation turned to where she is from. I don't know. Neither do you,neither does Farage. Its proof of nothing

[Redway]

Originally Posted by Alf

I've had a post deleted from here. So because of that, I'll be taking myself of the forum for 6 months.

See you in June.

Have a good Christmas

That got deleted but other people’s insults from a page or two back didn’t?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Redway

B.I.B. I: does L.T. have any friends?

B.I.B. II: daily fail, most-probably.

Originally Posted by Redway

That got deleted but other people’s insults from a page or two back didn’t?

do you mean this one?

[Redway]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

So if a white woman wants their help they will be denied because of the colour of their skin…
Is that not the epitome of Racism?…

No because black people in this part of the world have been oppressed in a very specific way and sometimes need a specific kind of support/common ground to get the most appropriate help for their needs. White people don’t need specific protection in the U.K. just because they’re white.

[thesheriff443]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Again, no proof that it was recorded but it takes less than a second to hit record....maybe she was recording the whole affair for prosperity, maybe she hit record when the conversation turned to where she is from. I don't know. Neither do you,neither does Farage. Its proof of nothing

She released a full transcript of the conversation

She is pro Meghan and anti royals

[Swan]

Originally Posted by Redway

No because black people in this part of the world have been oppressed in a very specific way and sometimes need a specific kind of support/common ground to get the most appropriate help for their needs. White people don’t need specific protection in the U.K. just because they’re white.

Wasn't it you who said all Polish, Albanians, Romanians etc in this country are oppressed in this part of the world ie the UK? When 99% of European immigration is white.

Btw, if it wasn't you who said that i apologise.

[thesheriff443]

The queen was no fool, if this woman was racist she wouldn’t of been part of the queens inner circle for 60 years.

[Redway]

Originally Posted by Swan

Wasn't it you who said all Polish, Albanians, Romanians etc in this country are oppressed in this part of the world ie the UK? When 99% of European immigration is white.

Btw, if it wasn't you who said that i apologise.

Yeah, I definitely don’t remember saying anything like that.

As far as what’s actually relevant goes my point is a lot of black people do need black-tailored services when it comes to certain things (including in the police-force, for the black people in the U.K. & Ireland who are officers). Arguing against that with reverse-racism (which so isn’t a thing, by the way) isn’t the best form.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Redway

No because black people in this part of the world have been oppressed in a very specific way and sometimes need a specific kind of support/common ground to get the most appropriate help for their needs.

No-one who's alive now will even have had great-grandparents who were slaves. There comes a point where if they're not over it by now, no amount of support will help them get their lives together.

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Then why say she had a tape recorder on her and therefore she pre-planned it? They were his words. I hazard that 95% of the people there had phones with recording capabilities. They had not taken them with intent....so why had this women?

There is actually no evidence that is was recorded, the "transcript" only has been released and from what I can gather that is Ngozi's recollection of the conversation. I would hazard if there was a recording it would be out there now. He's pushing a taped conversation that no-one knows exists as proof of intent to cause this row. It's lazy journalism and baiting

Because it’s probably a a mis use of words…and we have been told there is a transcript ….so you can only think that it’s a recording on her phone. Having said that if there is no recording are we to believe that everything she has said actually happened the way it did?… are there witnesses?
The Royal in question has resigned so I guess she is taking account of her own actions…but was it THAT bad or is everybody treading on eggshells and just doing what ‘looks’ the right thing to do

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

She released a full transcript of the conversation

She is pro Meghan and anti royals

And? I could release a transcript of a conversation I just had, I don't have a recording of it but its my recollection and the transcript would be out there.
No proof that she intentionally took a recording device to cause this as Farage said. That's my argument here.