The "wants to make you hate all black women" seems to be the phrase which is drawing the most ire.Not sure if you’ve misread, nowhere am I talking about the racist or misogynistic language, except where I expressed dismay at the blatant lie that it wasn’t racist and misogynistic.
My issue is with reporting him to the police for incitement to violence when that very clearly wasn’t what happened. Saying someone needs shooting is a very normal figure of speech which in no way is a call to violence.
We've had two MPs killed in recent years by people claiming political motivations which were clearly an extreme interpretation of mainstream rhetoric.
Problem is that the right is full of nutters who aren’t shy of resorting to violence. Ask Jo Coxes family. It only needs one to take it as a call to arms. So at the end of the day I guess it depends on your definition of “serious”.
The "wants to make you hate all black women" seems to be the phrase which is drawing the most ire.
That's the story. That needs to be front and centre of the coverage.
Complaining about the use of the shooting part of the quote is classic dead cat strategy.
You've fallen for it.
The "wants to make you hate all black women" seems to be the phrase which is drawing the most ire.
That's the story. That needs to be front and centre of the coverage.
Complaining about the use of the shooting part of the quote is classic dead cat strategy.
You've fallen for it.
Pretty sure there are various victims of extremist violence who would disagree with you on this one.Saying someone needs shooting is a very normal figure of speech which in no way is a call to violence.
It wasn’t that long ago that MP was shot dead due to the sort of moronic comments.Do wish we’d stop pretending we don’t understand hyperbole and rhetoric. “Needs shooting” is not a genuine call for violence against someone.
Pretty sure there are various victims of extremist violence who would disagree with you on this one.
Extreme cases, you might say, but your position is an untenable one for anyone who wants to talk seriously about making politics less partisan, or kinder, or more solutions-oriented etc etc.
It wasn’t that long ago that MP was shot dead due to the sort of moronic comments.
Shmmeee has gone so far to the right in labour he can't see the wood for the trees now when it comes to members of the 2019 shadow cabinet (apart from Starmer)Pretty sure there are various victims of extremist violence who would disagree with you on this one.
Extreme cases, you might say, but your position is an untenable one for anyone who wants to talk seriously about making politics less partisan, or kinder, or more solutions-oriented etc etc.
Why does it matter? She, that’s SHE was targeted by a right wing nut case who was motivated by what other people were saying. She is a woman who represented the left of British politics targeted by a right winger. Why wouldn’t I mention her in relation to what has been said about Diane Abbot, a woman, a left winger who has been targeted by the right? Give your head a wobble.Why are you only mentioning one MP killed Tony?
Talk of swarms of immigrants arriving in the country, potential for it to lead to sexual violence etc - it’s the sort of hyperbolic moronic rhetoric that should have no place in politics.Can you explain how you drew that causality?
To keep the story in the news, obviously.Why would Diane Abbott be employing a dead cat strategy?
Talk of swarms of immigrants arriving in the country, potential for it to lead to sexual violence etc - it’s the sort of hyperbolic moronic rhetoric that should have no place in politics.
If you genuinely think it’s fair game to talk about shooting MPs (or anyone, for that matter), I’m not sure that else to say.
To keep the story in the news, obviously.
'Racist misogynist Tory donor reported to police' is great headlines for the Labour party.
Just listening to 5Live, and the rasict stuff is top of the story.
My point is that people like you, excusing Frank Hester for a turn of phrase in use by the likes of us (should be shot), implies that if he didn't really mean THAT, perhaps he's not really racist either.
His comments were racist.
Maybe ST holders should get the first opportunity to shoot people they don't like?You’re mixing all sorts of things together.
If you think anyone who says someone should be shot or needs shooting should be arrested for threats of violence I too am not sure that else to say.
Maybe ST holders should get the first opportunity to shoot people they don't like?
Oh, you don't agree with that either.
Just referring to our other little interaction about you thinking that non-ST holders should have priority over ST holders for certain high profile away games.Are you quite alright this morning?
You know full well that in this context it’s highly inappropriate and potentially dangerous.You’re mixing all sorts of things together.
If you think anyone who says someone should be shot or needs shooting should be arrested for threats of violence I too am not sure that else to say.
Whatever you think of Abbott she made a few good points yesterday about how she’s a single woman who lives alone and doesn’t drive so uses public transport so unless she becomes a recluse she’s very accessible. Based on that alone why wouldn’t she get the police involved? Your head is in the gutter if you think a vulnerable woman who’s had a call for the worst type of violence against her A) shouldn’t take that seriously and B) shouldn’t report it to the police. You’re so wrong on this one it’s ridiculous.Literally no one is disagreeing with you there. You seem to be saying it’s a binary position. I think all the claims are valid or none of them are. That’s a ridiculous take.
A dead cat strategy is putting something ridiculous on the table to distract from something else. You’re claiming Diane Abbott made up the inciting violence claim, she doesn’t really believe it, and it’s just to distract from the racism against her????
Assuming you’ve just misused dead cat, I think you’re claiming that the report to police is just for PR reasons. Which is exactly what I’m saying!
Whatever you think of Abbott she made a few good points yesterday about how she’s a single woman who lives alone and doesn’t drive so uses public transport so unless she becomes a recluse she’s very accessible. Based on that alone why wouldn’t she get the police involved? Your head is in the gutter if you think a vulnerable woman who’s had a call for the worst type of violence against her A) shouldn’t take that seriously and B) shouldn’t report it to the police. You’re so wrong on this one it’s ridiculous.
I think I see where the disconnect is hereIm not sure what over policing very normal language
Need the good ones to help us focus on changing what we canI just despair.
Whilst the world is burning, our nations press, politicians & police are now primarily focused on a racist rant about an MP made by a rich posh c**t 5 years ago in a private meeting.......
Stick a fork in me....I'm done.
I’ve made the case, his words are very clear, she’s a vulnerable and accessible person, it only takes one nutter and recent history suggests that there’s no shortage of that one nutter. If you can’t see that it’s your issue. Stating out how ridiculous your stance is based on the evidence of our own eyes and ears is not an insult it’s a statement of fact. The fact that you’ve gone full grendull and are now attempting to start a straw man argument using a wholly unrelated in every way case is a measurement of how how ridiculous you’re being. Again a statement of fact, not an insult. If you want a complement I’d say going full grendull is very out of character for you even on things we may have disagreed on in the past. Try taking Diane Abbot out of the equation and imagine someone had said similar about a woman you respect and love, maybe then the penny will drop.I’m really not sure what case is being made here. If I’m so wrong it’s ridiculous hopefully you can help me out instead of just insulting me.
Do you think there’s a threat to Abbotts life because of a comment several years ago in a private meeting? Or do you think there’s a threat to her life because it’s been reported now? Or do you think there’s no threat to life but best to be on the safe side because Abbott is vulnerable as an MP?
Out of interest, where did you stand on this?
Twitter user arrested over joke airport bomb threat
Police didn't see funny side of Paul Chambers's tweet that he'd 'blow Robin Hood airport sky high!' after it was closed by snowamp.theguardian.com
I think it was a ridiculous case, but clearly the director of public prosecutions felt differently at the time…Out of interest, where did you stand on this?
I think I see where the disconnect is here
I’ve made the case, his words are very clear, she’s a vulnerable and accessible person, it only takes one nutter and recent history suggests that there’s no shortage of that one nutter. If you can’t see that it’s your issue. Stating out how ridiculous your stance is based on the evidence of our own eyes and ears is not an insult it’s a statement of fact. The fact that you’ve gone full grendull and are now attempting to start a straw man argument using a wholly unrelated in every way case is a measurement of how how ridiculous you’re being. Again a statement of fact, not an insult. If you want a complement I’d say going full grendull is very out of character for you even on things we may have disagreed on in the past. Try taking Diane Abbot out of the equation and imagine someone had said similar about a woman you respect and love, maybe then the penny will drop.
he knows he's out in mayAndy Street has broke ranks and said that they should return the money. Fair play to him.
seems better than youAre you quite alright this morning?
Will no-one rid me of this turbulent priest....?Not to anyone remotely serious.
Libertarian? Name of new Party?I know they want his money, but the doubling down on this racist guy by the Tories is absurd. They're just so shit at this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?