[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by angus58

Do you not read the papers, watch the news, watch the political programmes in which she is actually SPEAKING and saying these things? Or do you simply rely on other people's opinions, especially extreme left wing idiots who will defend such crass racist hypocrisy simply because the perpetrator is black?
It is the likes of Dianne Abbot who pretend to be anti racist who are THE most racist people against white people. Racism is racism be it blacks to whites, or whites to blacks, there is no difference.

That first vid was probably posted by a BNP supporter. Note the link to the BNP website. My skin is crawling at the fact that I clicked on the link and actually entered the site. In the interview all she does is ask the public sector to be mindful of gender and race in making cuts. I don't see much wrong.

Diane Abbot is an idiot. The fact that she's ultra left wing but sent her son to a private school is enough to demonstrate her level of hypocrisy; especially since she'd previously criticised Tony Blair for doing the same thing. She wont win the vote but she'll make it interesting.

[BB_Eye]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Diane Abbot is an idiot. The fact that she's ultra left wing but sent her son to a private school is enough to demonstrate her level of hypocrisy;.

Her hypocrisy doesn't end there either. On Question Time, she was very firm and moral in her response to the David Laws scandal. Saying he deserved to face the consequences of claiming expenses, ie money that didn't belong to him, to live with his partner.

Less than a month later, we get this.

Youtube video

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by BB_Eye

Her hypocrisy doesn't end there either. On Question Time, she was very firm and moral in her response to the David Laws scandal. Saying he deserved to face the consequences of claiming expenses, ie money that didn't belong to him, to live with his partner.

Less than a month later, we get this.

Youtube video

Good post.

The comments attributed to her in this vid are far more biased than her comment in the OP's vid.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

That first vid was probably posted by a BNP supporter. Note the link to the BNP website. My skin is crawling at the fact that I clicked on the link and actually entered the site. In the interview all she does is ask the public sector to be mindful of gender and race in making cuts. I don't see much wrong.

Diane Abbot is an idiot. The fact that she's ultra left wing but sent her son to a private school is enough to demonstrate her level of hypocrisy; especially since she'd previously criticised Tony Blair for doing the same thing. She wont win the vote but she'll make it interesting.

Are you suggesting that the video posted was tampered with in some way? If not, then that is what she said, whoever posted it. So how do you interpret her suggesting to local councils to "be mindful"? The majority of people have rightly interpreted it as racist, since she is suggesting insiduously but quite blatantly that ethnic workers should get preferential treatment. Don't white people also have to pay mortgages and utilities and buy food, or must they be expected to stand aside for an ethnic worker who was last in and, by rights, as in all other walks of life should thus be first out?

Oh, and she doesn't reserve her racism only for white people, countless thousands of whom do not enjoy the lifestyle and privileges that she does, but she also looks down her nose at black street culture which she does not wish HER son to be part of. In fact she pretty much looks down her nose at virtually everyone, while she sits up in her ivory tower, having milked MP expenses whilst sanctimoniously criticising tory mps for the same thing.

Is there anything much worse or damaging to the cause of racial equality in this country than a black female labour MP who does NOT practise what she preaches? SHE is the one who will set race relations back by a decade by making such crass and inflammatory remarks.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by angus58

Are you suggesting that the video posted was tampered with in some way? If not, then that is what she said, whoever posted it. So how do you interpret her suggesting to local councils to "be mindful"? The majority of people have rightly interpreted it as racist, since she is suggesting insiduously but quite blatantly that ethnic workers should get preferential treatment. Don't white people also have to pay mortgages and utilities and buy food, or must they be expected to stand aside for an ethnic worker who was last in and, by rights, as in all other walks of life should thus be first out?

Oh, and she doesn't reserve her racism only for white people, countless thousands of whom do not enjoy the lifestyle and privileges that she does, but she also looks down her nose at black street culture which she does not wish HER son to be part of. In fact she pretty much looks down her nose at virtually everyone, while she sits up in her ivory tower, having milked MP expenses whilst sanctimoniously criticising tory mps for the same thing.

Is there anything much worse or damaging to the cause of racial equality in this country than a black female labour MP who does NOT practise what she preaches? SHE is the one who will set race relations back by a decade by making such crass and inflammatory remarks.

Unless I'm mistaken she says be mindful of gender and ethnic origin. By mentioning gender does that means she's sexist too?

People have, as usual, completely over reacted to a single comment.

[fruit_cake]

i hope she doesn't win

[arista]

"Diane Abbot is an idiot. The fact that she's ultra left wing but sent her son to a private school is enough to demonstrate her level of hypocrisy"



Bang On Right

[arista]

Yes good VT
BB Eye.

She is to Chummy to be on TV now.
It all stinks.

[Angus]

Funny that, but not surprising to me that no-one seems able to explain what the comment about "being mindful" is supposed to mean, if not to take into consideration the colour of the person being sacked/made redundant. THAT is why she is being accused of racism, because she IS a racist.

Black workers have no more right to protection of their jobs than white workers or any other ethnicity for that matter. Normal rules of "last in, first out" should always apply. Positive discrimination is no different from any other kind of discrimination, and the fact this labour bitch is even suggesting it is absolutely disgraceful, blatantly unfair, undemocratic AND racist.

I will assume from the deafening silence on this thread that those seeking to defend her comments, CANNOT.

[BB_Eye]

Originally Posted by angus58

Funny that, but not surprising to me that no-one seems able to explain what the comment about "being mindful" is supposed to mean, if not to take into consideration the colour of the person being sacked/made redundant. THAT is why she is being accused of racism, because she IS a racist.

Black workers have no more right to protection of their jobs than white workers or any other ethnicity for that matter. Normal rules of "last in, first out" should always apply. Positive discrimination is no different from any other kind of discrimination, and the fact this labour bitch is even suggesting it is absolutely disgraceful, blatantly unfair, undemocratic AND racist.

I will assume from the deafening silence on this thread that those seeking to defend her comments, CANNOT.

She says the progress black and ethnic minorities have made in employment are relatively recent which is true, hence the larger proportion of whites among older public sector workers. What she said wasn't anti-meritocratic or racist, because it isn't for lack of merit that it took black employees a longer time to make inroads. It's purely a matter of redressing an imbalance for which racism was the original catalyst.

The last thing this country wants to risk is further alienating ethnic minorities by kicking them out of jobs that they had to fight harder and longer for just because of their skin colour. There is more than a grain of truth to what she said about the cuts potentially setting back race relations a generation.

[Angus]

Originally Posted by BB_Eye

She says the progress black and ethnic minorities have made in employment are relatively recent which is true, hence the larger proportion of whites among older public sector workers. What she said wasn't anti-meritocratic or racist, because it isn't for lack of merit that it took black employees a longer time to make inroads. It's purely a matter of redressing an imbalance for which racism was the original catalyst.

The last thing this country wants to risk is further alienating ethnic minorities by kicking them out of jobs that they had to fight harder and longer for just because of their skin colour. There is more than a grain of truth to what she said about the cuts potentially setting back race relations a generation.

Totally irrelevant - if they were last in they should be first out - that's the way it is, and it doesn't matter if they're black, white, yellow, male or female - any form of positive discrimination is racist. To actually sack white workers who have been in post longer and may be more experienced, and who also have to pay their mortgages, feed and clothe themselves and their families etc, to make way for ethnic workers so that some arbitrary quota can be fulfilled and a few more boxes can be ticked, is a disastrous step backwards in terms of race relations - if she can't see that she is even more stupid than I thought she was. This country already bends over backwards not to upset other cultures - where will it all end? For example, should councils "be mindful" about muslims,jews, asians, eastern europeans, gays, women, disabled people etc etc. How will that actually work in practice? Who gets to decide which section of the community have been the most hard done by throughout the centuries?

The more that the politically correct brigade attempt to redress the balance, the more THEY promote resentment, civil unrest and injustice. Why meddle with a perfectly fair and reasonable way of dealing with redundancies and sackings - LAST IN, FIRST OUT, simple, concise and fair.

[BB_Eye]

Originally Posted by angus58

Totally irrelevant - if they were last in they should be first out - that's the way it is, and it doesn't matter if they're black, white, yellow, male or female - any form of positive discrimination is racist. To actually sack white workers who have been in post longer and may be more experienced, and who also have to pay their mortgages, feed and clothe themselves and their families etc, to make way for ethnic workers so that some arbitrary quota can be fulfilled and a few more boxes can be ticked, is a disastrous step backwards in terms of race relations - if she can't see that she is even more stupid than I thought she was. This country already bends over backwards not to upset other cultures - where will it all end? For example, should councils "be mindful" about muslims,jews, asians, eastern europeans, gays, women, disabled people etc etc. How will that actually work in practice? Who gets to decide which section of the community have been the most hard done by throughout the centuries?

But she isn't proposing we set arbitrary quotas and she is not saying black workers ought to be given priority. I don't see how you could take that from what she said. Perhaps there is no measure that could be taken, realistically, to deal with the way black workers will be at a disadvantage, but I think it is naive to think that the public sector job cuts won't harm race relations in the long term. It seems inevitable to me and it will be a crippling setback for the socio-economic position of black and ethnic minorities.

The more that the politically correct brigade attempt to redress the balance, the more THEY promote resentment, civil unrest and injustice. Why meddle with a perfectly fair and reasonable way of dealing with redundancies and sackings - LAST IN, FIRST OUT, simple, concise and fair.

I think it has its advantages and disadvantages. Aside from the race relations issue, it causes inertia in the jobs market and undermines social mobility at large. I think it has a lot to answer for regarding the appalling level of youth unemployment in the UK. But I recognise how important it is to give serious consideration to staff who have worked for an organisation for decades. There is no easy answer.