Racist abuse response

[Hamble]

Tyrone Mings addressed Patel's comment, not me. Though there's no doubt that she said what she did. That was the entire point of Mings' tweet. She could, and should have condemned the booing of players taking the knee. They are private citizens, they have every right to protest or express an opinion.



Why not address Zero's post, then? What is the significance of two photos of Johnson & Starmer? Zero was talking about them both.




What difference would Warsi being Foreign Sec. have made to anything? I'll give her her due, she's a rare one nation Tory. She addressed the issue on 'The Last Leg' last Friday, before the final, eloquently and fairly. I doubt you can see clips of just her pieces, but I'd urge you to watch her. I might not agree with her politics in general, but at least she isn't a hard right attack dog chosen for her unwavering loyalty to the racist in chief.

I do agree with BLM's calls to 'defund the police'. I'd agree with anything progressive that helps the police do a very difficult job. I think most would agree with the concept of 'defund the police', if they bothered to find out what it means.

I did not address Zero's post as he did not complain that I made it a political issue as he did.

Actually I do watch Baroness Warsi after all she was kind of refreshing back in the day before she got where she wanted to in her career.

From
2011
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/interv...-warsi-1.29210

To
2018
https://www.thejc.com/news/features/...group-1.463152

[Hamble]

Tyrone Mings addressed Patel's comment, not me. Though there's no doubt that she said what she did. That was the entire point of Mings' tweet. She could, and should have condemned the booing of players taking the knee. They are private citizens, they have every right to protest or express an opinion.



Why not address Zero's post, then? What is the significance of two photos of Johnson & Starmer? Zero was talking about them both.




What difference would Warsi being Foreign Sec. have made to anything? I'll give her her due, she's a rare one nation Tory. She addressed the issue on 'The Last Leg' last Friday, before the final, eloquently and fairly. I doubt you can see clips of just her pieces, but I'd urge you to watch her. I might not agree with her politics in general, but at least she isn't a hard right attack dog chosen for her unwavering loyalty to the racist in chief.

I do agree with BLM's calls to 'defund the police'. I'd agree with anything progressive that helps the police do a very difficult job. I think most would agree with the concept of 'defund the police', if they bothered to find out what it means.

Quote TM
"What difference would Warsi being Foreign Sec. have made to anything"?

I certainly do not agree with defund the police.
USA civilians can protect themselves with guns.
Brits would be at the mercy of Terrorists racists and control freaks.

[Toodles McGinty]

I did not address Zero's post as he did not complain that I made it a political issue as he did.

Actually I do watch Baroness Warsi after all she was kind of refreshing back in the day before she got where she wanted to in her career.

From
2011
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/interv...-warsi-1.29210

To
2018
https://www.thejc.com/news/features/...group-1.463152

I know little about her part from interviews & TV appearances. I've always time for a one-nation Tory, though, even if our beliefs differ. I miss them, to be fair. It's good to be open minded rather than rabidly pursue a single tenet.

Hard to say what the differences are between the two clips. One's an interview, the other is a 'he said / she said' article. An interview seven years later might be revealing.

I certainly do not agree with defund the police.
USA civilians can protect themselves with guns.
Brits would be at the mercy of Terrorists racists and control freaks.

You don't? Really? I'm genuinely surprised. I thought you'd be front and centre on law and order.

What have guns got to do with anything?

We'd be far better protected from terrorists, surely?

I'd think educationally we'd be in a better place to kill off racism. As for 'control freaks', only a politically aware populace will do that. After the far right have taken away the right to protest, taken away voting rights, they usually end up swinging from lamp posts. It'll be a tough wait, but it will crumble eventually.

[sandGroundZero]

The abuse directed against England players after last night's valiant effort was beyond disgraceful.
This was a time for ALL of our political leaders to show a united front against the scum.
Initially this was indeed the case - until - Starmer, later in the day, decided the situation was an ideal opportunity to garner some grubby political capital.
He clearly took a conscious decision on this by calling into question the PM's leadership qualities re 'taking the knee' - obviously diluting what force the earlier unity had.
A united response was required by all but …

I did not address Zero's post as he did not complain that I made it a political issue as he did.

Who introduced the party political aspect into this thread?

…Labour's Starmer sought personal and Party gain above this. The public will, I'm sure, draw their own conclusions.

…
"Keir Starmer, a real rather than a plastic fan, got it right when he said: “On and off the pitch, this team is the very best of our country. They’ve done us proud.” In contrast, Johnson conspicuously steered clear of England’s off-the-field achievements.
…
"Tory politicians naturally want to hug the England team close but some are clearly uncomfortable about its off-the-pitch stance. Revealingly, Johnson hesitated over whether to support the minority of spectators who booed when the players took the knee, before saying they should cheer the team. …"

— Keir Starmer understands this England team
in a way Boris Johnson never could
Andrew Grice

It appears a goodly portion of "the public" have discerned a touch of hypocrisy in the Tory party.

[Hamble]

I know little about her part from interviews & TV appearances. I've always time for a one-nation Tory, though, even if our beliefs differ. I miss them, to be fair. It's good to be open minded rather than rabidly pursue a single tenet.

Hard to say what the differences are between the two clips. One's an interview, the other is a 'he said / she said' article. An interview seven years later might be revealing.




You don't? Really? I'm genuinely surprised. I thought you'd be front and centre on law and order.

What have guns got to do with anything?

We'd be far better protected from terrorists, surely?

I'd think educationally we'd be in a better place to kill off racism. As for 'control freaks', only a politically aware populace will do that. After the far right have taken away the right to protest, taken away voting rights, they usually end up swinging from lamp posts. It'll be a tough wait, but it will crumble eventually.

How would funding cure racism?

Immigrants are always going to be at a disadvantage.
They will always stand out by accent or culture mostly by choice
in self determination to keep cultural identity.

There will always be wealthy white boys jealous of an elite Black footballer.

If you defund the police you move monetary resources elsewhere.
Putting that money into community projects.
Who would police that?

[Hamble]

Who introduced the party political aspect into this thread?





It appears a goodly portion of "the public" have discerned a touch of hypocrisy in the Tory party.

Cheek!

https://order-order.com/2021/07/14/m...tackle-racism/


Zero post 15#
As I said -carrying on the theme.

[Polly Trott]

I think the best comment on this came from Tyrone Mings. Followed by ex-Tory Party Chairman Baroness Sayeeda Warsi:

Yes, Tyrone Mings tweet should be a game changer. It shines a spot light on the hypocrisy of this government. It can't be unseen.

[Alikado]

It's incorrect to assume that someone of Asian descent who has experienced racism from white people cannot be racist against black people.

In the early 80's I had a mate who lived in Bradford and used to visit regularly, he always used to say that if there was any issues it was always black v brown.

[gazaprop]

Who introduced the party political aspect into this thread?





It appears a goodly portion of "the public" have discerned a touch of hypocrisy in the Tory party.

I think the root of my point might be - which is worse ? Hypocrisy or political opportunism on the back of despicable behaviour.

Zero is perfectly correct - I brought the party political aspect into the discussion. I did so because of, what I perceived, to be yet another weaselesque journey along the 'let's get as much as we can out of this awful situation'.
Labour are not alone in this, they just happen to be the current HM'S opposition and this is how things are done.
No sense of honour or right, just screw as much as we can out of this.

[Toodles McGinty]

How would funding cure racism?

Education.

Immigrants are always going to be at a disadvantage.
They will always stand out by accent or culture mostly by choice
in self determination to keep cultural identity.

Education. There's nothing wrong with keeping cultural identity. I don't know anyone who attacks Irish people when celebrating St Patrick's Day, for example. Youth clubs to create a sense of community, rather than leaving kids at the mercy of gangs. I don't know anyone who objects to an immigrant surgeon performing life saving operations on them if they maintain some cultural identity.

And of course a government putting out a clear message that racism won't be tolerated under any circumstances, rather than calling a legitimate protest of 20 seconds of kneeling 'gesture politics'.

There will always be wealthy white boys jealous of an elite Black footballer.

Why? What does the colour of a footballer's skin, or anyone else's for that matter, make you consider there will 'always' be such? That in itself is casual racism, defending the racists as though it is inevitable - 'oh well, white boys will be white boys, that's just the way'. 'I'm not racist but there will always be...'. No. Not 'always'. Not with education. Not with a clear message from the highest office that such things are intolerable.

Of course, if the message from the highest office is 'it's OK if you boo people taking a stand against racism', then you get the situation we find ourselves in now.

If you defund the police you move monetary resources elsewhere.
Putting that money into community projects.
Who would police that?

Who polices any project? Why does a project need policing? Are social services 'policed'? Are immigrant services 'policed'? Or do they answer to governing bodies or a set of standards?

If you defund the police, you free up police time better used in pursuit of criminals. How many times have people said 'there are no police on the streets' or 'they didn't even come out after I was burgled'? Undeniably the slashing of police numbers and resources has had an effect, but switching some funding to relieve the police of civil matters would help them.

As always, you put party before everything. Everything has to be 'but the left...'. The left isn't in government. The answer to the accusation that Patel and Johnson encouraged racists by not condemning them, and stating taking the knee is 'gesture politics', is not 'but someone drew a cartoon of Priti Patel once'. The answer is 'yes, they were wrong'.

[Toodles McGinty]

I think the root of my point might be - which is worse ? Hypocrisy or political opportunism on the back of despicable behaviour.

Zero is perfectly correct - I brought the party political aspect into the discussion. I did so because of, what I perceived, to be yet another weaselesque journey along the 'let's get as much as we can out of this awful situation'.
Labour are not alone in this, they just happen to be the current HM'S opposition and this is how things are done.
No sense of honour or right, just screw as much as we can out of this.

I'd agree with you had Starmer not called out Johnson's ‘failure of leadership’ over a lack of support for England players who are ‘taking the knee’ in early June, before the Euros started.


He said: 'The prime minister was wrong when he refused to call it out. He didn’t have the guts to call it out, he hedged his bets and in doing so he undermined the team on the verge of this competition.'

So it wasn't a case of jumping on the bandwagon after the event, or making political capital.

Plus had Starmer said nothing, the opposition parties, along with the rest of us, would accuse him of not opposing the government, or (once again) supporting the government when he should be scrutinising them and holding them to account. I know I certainly would, because he doesn't oppose the government enough in my opinion. That's one of the things I don't like about him.

Caroline Lucas and Ed Davey made similar statements on Monday. That's their job as the opposition. I'll be honest, I can't be bothered Googling it, but I'd wager the SNP and Welsh Labour & Plaid have done the same.

[local]

The crazy thinking behind defund the Police, prioritise housing, employment, community health, education and other vital programs, instead of police officers.

A simplistic throw money leftist argument that completely ignores those who don't break the law or act in an antisocial manner when they are sick and skint.

The problem is that the scum have money from their thieving and drug dealing it doesn't stop them.

The Police and Justice system costs are dwarfed by jus Social Security payments.

The Conservatives have defunded the Police and the Justice system and the left berates them for it.

The only way to improve everyone's lot is for a healthy tax take from a busy successful economy.

[Albion102]

I thought that defund the police was really only relevant in an American context because of the different structures, funding and accountability mechanisms that they have for police forces over there.

There is also a big difference between the concept of "Black Lives Matter" which is what taking the knee celebrates and BLM, which is a fringe political movement. It is the same in the UK, if you feel strongly about a single issue, and decide actually to protest, you find the whole thing completely appropriated by the many left wing "Spartist" groups.

[Toodles McGinty]

I thought that defund the police was really only relevant in an American context because of the different structures, funding and accountability mechanisms that they have for police forces over there.

I do think there is a case for restructuring police funding, taking in public safety aspects, the amount of police time wasted on activities that are better dealt with by other bodies, youth services, education, communities, etc. Not by particularly taking funds from the police, but prioritising the police themselves, then looking at some areas getting funds outside of the police.

Given the appalling behaviour highlighted over the past few weeks - not just the racism - I'd say an inquiry into all manner of behaviour, policies, and resources is needed. Compare the antics of England fans all around London with the equivalent fan zones in Italy. The thugs storming Wembley, causing physical harm to others. And the typically British p!$$ing in the street, vandalising, littering. Almost exclusively male, but not exclusively young men. Tiny penis bloke was well into middle age. Well, apart from his manhood which appeared to be that of a 5 year old. Maybe that's the problem...

There are also questions about how thousands of p!$$ed up football thugs can tear through the capital with alacrity, free from any police attention, yet grieving women get beaten to the ground by the police while protesting about abuse from one of them. Again, a signal, or dog-whistle to the new Tory base from the Home Office, perhaps? A mistake, to my mind. Those 'borrowed' votes may well come at the expense of traditional blue votes.

So much to unpick, but a fish rots from the head.

[Toodles McGinty]

The crazy thinking behind defund the Police, prioritise housing, employment, community health, education and other vital programs, instead of police officers.

Not 'instead' of police officers. The amount of police officer's time and the costs pursuing issues that could be better handled by other bodies would be saved over time. I'd rather the police pursued crime instead. Or worked more with communities.

A simplistic throw money leftist argument that completely ignores those who don't break the law or act in an antisocial manner when they are sick and skint.

Why would the police be interested in those that don't break the law or act in an antisocial manner? People who don't break the law or are 'sick or skint' are entirely irrelevant to the discussion. I would imagine the social problems of illness and poverty would be handled by different departments, defunding the police or not.

The problem is that the scum have money from their thieving and drug dealing it doesn't stop them.

Far better to give the police resources to fight crime, then.

The Police and Justice system costs are dwarfed by jus Social Security payments.

Yes, by almost 3 times. What a great shame we don't live in a country where poverty is eradicated and 'in-work' benefits are completely unnecessary.

The Conservatives have defunded the Police and the Justice system and the left berates them for it.

The Conservatives have slashed police budgets and police numbers, not 'defunded' them. I shouldn't worry, it seems quite a lot of people don't understand the concept of 'defunding'

The only way to improve everyone's lot is for a healthy tax take from a busy successful economy.

I agree. More and better jobs, eradicate poverty, tax increases for those earning the most. Democratic socialism.