Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Jeremy Paxman

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
Applying to Uni? Let Universities come to you. Click here to get your perfect place 20-10-2014
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)

    Galloway and the bulk of RESPECT activists, are the most vehement anti-nazi and anti-racist campaigners there are. RESPECT in Bethnal Green and Bow selected Galloway to stand here, simply because he is our most prominent candidate, best orator and we had our best European Election results here. Is that really a bad thing to do?


    Why did George Galloway not defend his own seat in Glasgow? Simple - he was too much of a coward to do so!!!


    George Galloway comes from the same mould of far left-wing politicians as a certain Robert Kilroy-Silk (both former left wing Labour MPs). They are inherently opportunitistic and deeply suspicous (basically racist) of large sections of the community. It may be that Jeremy Paxman is aware that Mr Galloway is deeply suspicious of black people and was the inspiration behind his opening question.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ataloss)
    Why did George Galloway not defend his own seat in Glasgow? Simple - he was too much of a coward to do so!!!


    George Galloway comes from the same mould of far left-wing politicians as a certain Robert Kilroy-Silk (both former left wing Labour MPs). They are inherently opportunitistic and deeply suspicous (basically racist) of large sections of the community. It may be that Jeremy Paxman is aware that Mr Galloway is deeply suspicious of black people and was the inspiration behind his opening question.
    On what basis do you say that Galloway's deeply suspicious of the black community?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Well yes, he often can be a tawt - apologies if i have misunderstood what is a slight juggling of words!? 'Twát'?

    I think the trouble with Paxman is....he asks stupid questions, there were several occasions in his series of interviews with the 3 main party leaders - asking for specific numbers of potential wind turbines stands to mind. Ok, he may be doing it in hope of triggering an outburst, but what would we then be learning? That these three party leaders are actually humane and share real human emotions, such as anger and frustration? He makes a mockery of politics, doesn't ask truly stinging, the necessary searching/probing questions AS MUCH as he could do...i just feel he's not fulfilling his potential as a potentially excellent prober, choosing to act childishly instead, all in the name of entertainment...lets face it, i think many people watch/listen to paxman for exactly that, which isn't always a good thing, unless the interviewee or himself have been shown up for good reason. Paxman looked beaten when interviewing Galloway, and indeed, the minutes after it.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kingslaw)
    But, your just assuming that positive discrimination is never used to overcome actual disabilities.

    Your not actually criticising its ability to work in theory. You're criticising that it is used incorrectly in practice..
    What do you mean work? You mean - that it CAN be used to benefit someone who would have gotten that benefit had the playing field been level? Its possible yes... but thats not to say that its used incorrectly - I would say that it is the incorrect method fullstop.

    It doesnt solve the problem, it engenders resentment and racism, it IS racist, it proceeds on a lack of evidence (being based on assumptions about what WOULD have happened), and it is terribly unjust to those who suffer at its hands.

    The proper route is to remove the major barriers to advancement and success that people of certain races and genders are faced with.

    (Original post by kingslaw)
    And yes, I don't think that positive discrinimation on the basis of gender or race is relevant anymore - mainly because racist and sexist views are no longer embedded amongst employers.
    Youre in a minority there - though one that I would include myself within. I dont think race plays that much role among most employers these days. Though it will play a role in the path and route to the credentials required.

    (Original post by kingslaw)
    I think the major obstacle to reaching your full potential is your socio-economic background. It just so happens that on average, a higher percentage of people from ethnic backgrounds are from the lowest socio-economic backgrounds. Unfortuanately, attempts to tackle these inequalities are lazily based on gender and race themselves, leading to completely counter-productive rules of positive discrimination..
    Indeed. I agree that the playing field needs to be levelled. But like I said - I consider the proper route to be better state education. MUCH better... MUCH MUCH better... I would have no trouble with more tax going in that direction.

    However I do not agree with ignoring or failing to fully address that, and instead giving people compensation for the poor system when assessing their suitability for something.

    (Original post by kingslaw)
    Most people die in the class they were born. I refuse to believe that is becase those born in the lowest socio-economic classes are naturally not as talented as those from the top.
    No of course not. There are numerous factors - not to mention the cultural differences. In some classes, education and hard work are derided.

    That is something that needs to be tackled too.


    We both agree there is a problem - I just dont agree with your solution.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Why did George Galloway not defend his own seat in Glasgow? Simple - he was too much of a coward to do so!!!
    Because his seat doesn't exist anymore due to boundary changes and the seat he would have had to in was also the seat in which Mohammad Sarwar would have been a candidate, and RESPECT do not stand against MP's like him, based on their record.

    To say George Galloway is racist is absolutely disgusting and a totally stupid thing to say. Galloway has campaigned against racism all his life, RESPECT endorsed Operation Black Vote, RESPECT stood two black candidates, as well as at least 9 others from other ethnic minorities.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    Because his seat doesn't exist anymore due to boundary changes and the seat he would have had to in was also the seat in which Mohammad Sarwar would have been a candidate, and RESPECT do not stand against MP's like him, based on their record.

    To say George Galloway is racist is absolutely disgusting and a totally stupid thing to say. Galloway has campaigned against racism all his life, RESPECT endorsed Operation Black Vote, RESPECT stood two black candidates, as well as at least 9 others from other ethnic minorities.

    There were other seats in Glasgow - where pro-war MPs were standing it doesn't wash.

    A quick look at the RESPECT website and its candidates for the election did not show a single black candidate (not that that in itself is any way a measure of racism - the BNP had candidates from ethnic minorities and I think there are very few people who don't believe Nick Griffin is racist).

    To clarify my point from earlier - I merely said many far left politicians are inherently suspicous of people from other communities in the same way as many far right politicians are. I am therefore deeply suspicious of George Galloway. The final point I made was that Jeremy Paxman clearly has had numerous dealings and knowledge of Mr Galloway - much more than any of us on this website - and perhaps he has a greater insight and hence the basis for his initial question on Friday morning.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    There were other seats in Glasgow, but they were no more his seat than Bethnal Green and Bow. Also RESPECT endorsed the Scottish Socialist Party north of the border.

    You should look closer ataloss. Both Dean Ryan our canddiate in Hackney South and Janet Alder our canddiate in Tottenham are black.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    There were other seats in Glasgow, but they were no more his seat than Bethnal Green and Bow. Also RESPECT endorsed the Scottish Socialist Party north of the border.

    You should look closer ataloss. Both Dean Ryan our canddiate in Hackney South and Janet Alder our canddiate in Tottenham are black.

    I should have looked closer and I apologise for that (it was only a quick look as I said). But as I said earlier that doesn't in itself mean anything.

    As for the constituency business - how a seat around 500 miles away from a city where you have worked for much of your political life can be considered to be no more of his seat is simply beyond me.

    The simple fact is he knew he would not win in his home city and was too cowardly to stand there.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tomorrow2Day)

    Galloway picked Bethnal Green because he could win there by exploiting ethnic tensions, targetting a muslim population with an incredible propensity to vote against half-Jewish, black, female Oona King.
    .
    So? Thats politics, they are all strategists, and tacticians...there isn't one politician who wouldn't choose a constituency where their view would be heavily supported, any other politician would do it in an area where opinion was going to be that obvious. Look at the technology they use to target marginals, even down to varying the info they give you based on age, social group, etc. He may also have picked Bethnal Green because he and Oona King disliked each other, and probably because he sees her as an unswerving Blairite.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ataloss)
    The simple fact is he knew he would not win in his home city and was too cowardly to stand there.
    How many politicians would choose a seat where they had no chance over one where they had a great chance...?
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lawz-)
    The proper route is to remove the major barriers to advancement and success that people of certain races and genders are faced with.
    .
    Is there that much these days?
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ataloss)
    It may be that Jeremy Paxman is aware that Mr Galloway is deeply suspicious of black people and was the inspiration behind his opening question.
    Any evidence for that?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I agree that the way in which paxman asked the question was too emotive. However i thought the question was fair, at least from how i interpreted the question. I think Paxman was trying to highlight that Oona King was much better a representative of that constituency, being a black person, she knows about prejudices etc and can connect better with her electorate. Whereas Gallaway probably couldnt give a damn about them, and just wanted to get one over on Blair. Therefore he took the seat from someone who was a better candidate, just to annoy Blair and not to represent his constituency.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Richy Rich$$)
    I agree that the way in which paxman asked the question was too emotive. However i thought the question was fair, at least from how i interpreted the question. I think Paxman was trying to highlight that Oona King was much better a representative of that constituency, being a black person, she knows about prejudices etc and can connect better with her electorate. Whereas Gallaway probably couldnt give a damn about them, and just wanted to get one over on Blair. Therefore he took the seat from someone who was a better candidate, just to annoy Blair and not to represent his constituency.
    In what sense is she a better representative? That community is largely muslim, and shes half west-indian, half jewish. The voters had the freedom to decide..And why would she care any more about her constituents than Galloway.?
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by naivesincerity)
    Is there that much these days?
    not really.

    I actually mis-spoke - What I meant was that we should remove barriers based on what situation you are born into - including race and gender
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Frances)
    Ok, the entire quote:
    Asked if he would condemn suicide bombers the anti-war MP said: "I will not condemn an occupied people for using their legal rights, their legal rights as well as their moral rights to resist the illegal occupation of their country".
    .
    There is an illegal occupation, and he condones people acting within their "legal rights". I'd be interested to know what the exact quote for the question was, and what newspaper this comes from? Galloway claims to have protested against dictatorships in the middle east for years, and its a little hypocritical for the people who were previously supplying Saddam with weapons(the government) to make out he's in cahootz with him.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by naivesincerity)
    In what sense is she a better representative? That commmuntiy is largely muslim, and shes half west-indian, half jewish. The voters had the freedom to decide..Why would she care any more about her constituents than Galloway.?

    Because galloway only stood there because there was a large muslim population and therefore he knew he could use all his anti war stuff with great success and therefore get one over on Blair. I doubt he really wanted to represent their interests. Whereas at least Oona King doesnt have such selfish interests
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Richy Rich$$)
    Because galloway only stood there because there was a large muslim population and therefore he knew he could use all his anti war stuff with great success and therefore get one over on Blair. I doubt he really wanted to represent their interests. Whereas at least Oona King doesnt have such selfish interests
    But that clearly was a major interest for them...
    As for Oona King, course she has selfish interests, she's a careerist, and a Blairite. Somebody like Galloway/Livingstone/Corbin(or Anne Campbell my local labour MP)etc harms their career prospects(i know not this time, but usually) by taking anti-government stances all the time, so could hardly be described as selfish
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    This form of low journalistic ethic and partisan -almost Orwellian- style state-funded public opinion molding is nothing new to the BBC, it merely happened to be more easily interpreted than usual.

    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    Galloway and the bulk of RESPECT activists, are the most vehement anti-nazi and anti-racist campaigners there are.
    Well, of course George “the disappearance of the Soviet Union is the biggest catastrophe of my life” Galloway is an anti-Nazi, just like his Uncle Joe before him. Would that stop him running the odd pogrom now and then, though? Not only does “RESPECT” fail to condemn anti-semitic attacks which it has stoked up, it doesn't care much for old men beaten up by their own canvassers for refusing to take a leaflet, either.

    Most casualties are not, of course, caused by the resistance, armed with their homemade bombs and RPGs. The overwhelming majority of Iraqis have been killed by scud missiles, cluster bombs and US machine guns. Read up about what they did in Fallujah.
    I did when the allegations first emerged from far-left moonbat websites, thing is, their only sources were Al-Jazeera. The fact that you're prepared to believe organizations that broadcast the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion ( source ) as fact further confirms my suspicions about your party.

    That election was not free and fair. There are many reports of soldiers threateneing to withhold rations to those who didn't vote... [ad nauseam]
    Please show us sources for “withhold rations to those who didn't vote”, sounds like you're confusing Iraq for Zimbabwe. The two main Shiite parties won the majority of the seats, and actually managed to get a disproportionate number of votes due to continued violence in Sunni areas. It wasn't perfect, but it's certainly better than no elections. Regarding the authenticity; the fact is, the Iraqi elections were recognized by almost every nation, set up by the UN and accepted by many human rights and pro-Democracy organizations who oversaw them ( source ). I guess it's the word of the whole world against the bunch of pro-terrorism, anti-democratic Stalinists and Islamonutters thousands of miles away from where the incidents actually took place.

    Heh, of course they're against the occupation! Do you honestly think the allied forces want to stay in Iraq any longer than they have to either?

    Galloway cannot, and should not condemn suicde bombers. I cannot condone them or support them, but how can anyone call young people who have seen their country raped, their people massacred and their homes bulldozed, all the while seeing Jewish settlers steal resources andland, terrorists?
    Look, there's a lot of bad blood there but you've been fed far too much one-sided propaganda for so long. Israel happens to be an organ transplanted from the West into the East, one that's been rejected by its Muslim neighbors and the far-left who are hellbent on their destruction of Western values, and see it as a weak point in their jihad. and the Palestinians happen to be (and the surrounding Muslim nations who fund the terrorism) nothing more than the losing side in a long struggle they started when they decided that Jews have no right to rule themselves. You're a victim of bad reporting from the BBC, historical shortsightedness and anti-semitic racists.

    If you're such a spokesman for human rights, what do you think about the Copts (the decedents of the people who built the pyramids and worshiped the sun god Ra)? After a thousand years of gradual genocide, are now a minority in their rightful land: still denied basic rights, second-class citizens in many ways and persecuted by Muslims presumably until extinction. Or perhaps the Sudanese -who claim to be semitic folk descended from Solomon himself- Gradually being exterminated by Muslims as we speak? Or how about the fact that millions of women in Islamic nations are nothing more than slaves? Get a real cause.

    She worked as an ambulance volunteer. She watch a woman give birth in the dust at the checkpoint. The baby died. She saw an old man with a walking stick shot in the head. She told her parents how his blood and brains were on her hands. Do people expect this not to disturb and anger people? Does occupation not make people desperate?
    Yeah, well it's a war zone and people die in war zones, best thing you can hope for is peace. Since you're not giving as much time to the stories of Israeli children blown apart on buses by terrorist atrocities, I must assume that you're sympathetic to the side of the terrorists. Jews are human too, you know, and it might be wise to remember where it all started.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Most casualties are not, of course, caused by the resistance, armed with their homemade bombs and RPGs. The overwhelming majority of Iraqis have been killed by scud missiles, cluster bombs and US machine guns. Read up about what they did in Fallujah.
    I did when the allegations first emerged from far-left moonbat websites, thing is, their only sources were Al-Jazeera. The fact that you're prepared to believe organizations that broadcast the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion ( source ) as fact further confirms my suspicions about your party.
    Also, due to the anti-war stance of bulks of the media (Guardian, BBC, the Mail, etc..) and their rapid reaction to anything that'd discredit the coalition, it's very unlikely that they'd fail to report this major incident (remember the torture of terrorists?)
Updated: May 12, 2005
New on TSR

Submitting your UCAS application

How long did it take for yours to be processed?

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.