Post by vandamme on Jun 27, 2010 11:19:47 GMT
Link
I watched this live and found it quite a surreal experience, could I believe what was actually happening?!
So why am I posting what appears to be an UNBIASED article?
Simple: because we are not used to this sort of behaviour we all have a knee-jerk reaction (how many of you thought it was great, hands-up, me too!) but wait calm down and think about it.
Was her comment racist? Yes if you're PC, no if you're not. What weapon was used to beat her with, that's right a PC weapon. We are allowing ourselves to be sucked into the PC mindset by thinking this is great.
So what is my point then? Remember Kilroy-Silk? Why is Diane Abbott not sacked from the BBC?
This behaviour is typical of the brainwashing antics of the PC/BBC mindset, she isn't sacked but is made a scapegoat that we all are happy to help bash her with. STOP, she is being treated differently, treated in a PC way, therefore this is just a stunt and a biassed one at that. The BBC had to do something to fend off comments like we see on this excellent forum. But they didn't go far enough like they would have with "someone else"!
And finally, it is strange that things like
are being said, why then if any one else says these things that they are immediately branded as racists and sacked? Why isn't Andrew Neil sacked?
The BBC would label this sort of language "far-right wing talk", even if the comments are true.
Again the BBC is biased because they stifle and chastised comments like Neil's above (that is the PC way), but use this style when it suits them, again this shows this was a stunt since this sort of talk resonates with non-PC people like me.
I hope I have made myself clear so you can understand my points since this all stinks of 1984 double-think!
To sum up: the BBC by their own standards in the past should have sacked Abbott, especially since she is in a position of influence and authority. They did not, this is bias. They use words they themselves would call "far right-wing", this is to appease people, a brainwashing tactic, this is bias.
Labour leadership contender Diane Abbott was seething after being branded a ‘racist’ and an expenses cheat by political pundit Andrew Neil.
Left-winger Ms Abbott was savaged by Mr Neil on his late-night BBC show This Week over her decision to send her son James to the £12,700-a-year City of London School.
Ms Abbott, who earned £36,000 a year as a regular guest on the show alongside Michael Portillo until stepping down to fight for the Labour leadership, had defended her stance, saying: ‘West Indian mums will go to the wall for their children.’
Mr Neil hit back by demanding: ‘So black mums love their kids more than white mums, do they?’
Furious Ms Abbott said: ‘I have said everything I am going to say about where I send my son to school.’
Mr Neil persisted: ‘Supposing Michael said white mums will go to the wall for their children. Why did you say that? Isn’t it a racist remark?
'If West Indian mums are as wonderful as you say, why are there so many dysfunctional West Indian families in this country? And why do so many young West Indian men end up in a life of crime and gangs?
Left-winger Ms Abbott was savaged by Mr Neil on his late-night BBC show This Week over her decision to send her son James to the £12,700-a-year City of London School.
Ms Abbott, who earned £36,000 a year as a regular guest on the show alongside Michael Portillo until stepping down to fight for the Labour leadership, had defended her stance, saying: ‘West Indian mums will go to the wall for their children.’
Mr Neil hit back by demanding: ‘So black mums love their kids more than white mums, do they?’
Furious Ms Abbott said: ‘I have said everything I am going to say about where I send my son to school.’
Mr Neil persisted: ‘Supposing Michael said white mums will go to the wall for their children. Why did you say that? Isn’t it a racist remark?
'If West Indian mums are as wonderful as you say, why are there so many dysfunctional West Indian families in this country? And why do so many young West Indian men end up in a life of crime and gangs?
I watched this live and found it quite a surreal experience, could I believe what was actually happening?!
So why am I posting what appears to be an UNBIASED article?
Simple: because we are not used to this sort of behaviour we all have a knee-jerk reaction (how many of you thought it was great, hands-up, me too!) but wait calm down and think about it.
Was her comment racist? Yes if you're PC, no if you're not. What weapon was used to beat her with, that's right a PC weapon. We are allowing ourselves to be sucked into the PC mindset by thinking this is great.
So what is my point then? Remember Kilroy-Silk? Why is Diane Abbott not sacked from the BBC?
This behaviour is typical of the brainwashing antics of the PC/BBC mindset, she isn't sacked but is made a scapegoat that we all are happy to help bash her with. STOP, she is being treated differently, treated in a PC way, therefore this is just a stunt and a biassed one at that. The BBC had to do something to fend off comments like we see on this excellent forum. But they didn't go far enough like they would have with "someone else"!
And finally, it is strange that things like
If West Indian mums are as wonderful as you say, why are there so many dysfunctional West Indian families in this country? And why do so many young West Indian men end up in a life of crime and gangs?
are being said, why then if any one else says these things that they are immediately branded as racists and sacked? Why isn't Andrew Neil sacked?
The BBC would label this sort of language "far-right wing talk", even if the comments are true.
Again the BBC is biased because they stifle and chastised comments like Neil's above (that is the PC way), but use this style when it suits them, again this shows this was a stunt since this sort of talk resonates with non-PC people like me.
I hope I have made myself clear so you can understand my points since this all stinks of 1984 double-think!
To sum up: the BBC by their own standards in the past should have sacked Abbott, especially since she is in a position of influence and authority. They did not, this is bias. They use words they themselves would call "far right-wing", this is to appease people, a brainwashing tactic, this is bias.
It reminded me of the Donald Rumsfeld quote, and in the same way the BBC didn't appear to understand what he was referring to, preferring instead to ridicule him, they won't understand yours either. 
