A COUNCILLOR at the centre of a police investigation over alleged racist and homophobic comments has quit.
Dave Small resigned from the Church Hill Seat on Redditch Borough Council yesterday (Thursday) and intends to stand again as an independent candidate when a by-election is called.
Mr Small was booted out by UKIP just over a week ago for his comments which included branding gay people perverts.
He had been resisting calls to quit from Conservative, Labour and UKIP councillors.
But Mr Small told the Standard he changed his mind after being publicly urged to stand again by council leader Bill Hartnett and despite the revelations about his views was confident of winning again.
"People will stand by their vote and vote for me again," he said.
A protest organised by Coun Joe Baker ahead of Monday's council meeting (June 9) at 6.15pm outside the Town Hall is still going to go-ahead as planned.
"It's to show a united front and that Redditch is not homophobic."
We've been here before. Removing an artificial advantage is not the same as disadvantaging someone.
Diane Abbot was not talking about individuals.
Only if the artificial advantage actually exists and, if it does, is applicable to the individual. As I said if it is an Irishman their history is similar to non whites yet you categorise them as white and artificially advantaged by other white people some of whom have spent generations discriminating against them. Also if you pick up any Victorian anthropological book it refers frequently to the 'lower orders' and 'characteristics' that define people. When the 'white man' ruled the world it was very much the upper class white man with breeding and background and a class above the hoi polloi even when most of them were also white. Still its the poor what gets the blame.
Dianne Abbot was talking about individuals every individual white person.
Only if the artificial advantage actually exists and, if it does, is applicable to the individual. As I said if it is an Irishman their history is similar to non whites
That is not what an Irishman will tell you. Genocide by starvation, ethnic discrimination in land ownership in their own country, discrimination against them for accommodation, ethnic jokes as regards intelligence and many demeaning nicknames to name but a few. All the advantages of white people apparently. Or a history of their ethnic group as bad as any.
That is not what an Irishman will tell you. Genocide by starvation, ethnic discrimination in land ownership in their own country, discrimination against them for accommodation, ethnic jokes as regards intelligence and many demeaning nicknames to name but a few. All the advantages of white people apparently. Or a history of their ethnic group as bad as any.
It's just not as bad as being black. Nowhere near.
Your continued inability to argue the point is noted.
It's impossible to argue any point with someone who:
a) appears to have no concept of the real world,
b) steadfastly refuses to acknowledge any other viewpoint other than their own,
c) appears to form opinions based on what they read in the left-wing media,
d) is in constant denial as to what's staring them in the face.
What's your opinion on the Birmingham school(s) scandal, for instance? Your lot have kept very quiet on that one.
Edit: I've inadvertently described the average Labour 'politician' right there!
It's just not as bad as being black. Nowhere near.
Well you seem to know little of the Irish slave trade, or for that matter the Scottish Covenanter's sent to slave in the West Indies. The popular view of the Irish and the stereotypes illustrated in all the papers, pamphlets, books and publications are there for all to see as the criminal, bestial, primitive person. The colour of his skin was no route to redemption in the eyes of those who so described him.
The Indians sent abroad by Empire as indentured servants worked in exactly the same conditions of brutality, coercion and ownership as the Irish and the religious prisoners did and in exactly the same enforced or 'voluntary' arrangements.
You are observing the history of white people in the modern context of skin colour as opposed to the historic context that excluded from 'white' many ethnic white groups such as the Irish, Scottish Gael and even religious groups as well as the total exclusion of the lower orders who included the 'criminal classes'. With most of these peoples having spent many generations trying to escape the torture of the treadmill, both real and metaphorical, it is insulting for them to be now told they have a history of advantage and pampering and it is time to step aside and make way for the underprivileged. If you believe that will happen with meek obedience then I believe you are mistaken.
The latest scandal as regards the possibility of drug trials on Irish babies in the 30s is just another example of the viewpoint about certain groups/classes being expendable.
Comments
We'll see if he gets re-elected ...... somehow I doubt it.
Only if the artificial advantage actually exists and, if it does, is applicable to the individual. As I said if it is an Irishman their history is similar to non whites yet you categorise them as white and artificially advantaged by other white people some of whom have spent generations discriminating against them. Also if you pick up any Victorian anthropological book it refers frequently to the 'lower orders' and 'characteristics' that define people. When the 'white man' ruled the world it was very much the upper class white man with breeding and background and a class above the hoi polloi even when most of them were also white. Still its the poor what gets the blame.
Dianne Abbot was talking about individuals every individual white person.
It just isn't.
That is not what an Irishman will tell you. Genocide by starvation, ethnic discrimination in land ownership in their own country, discrimination against them for accommodation, ethnic jokes as regards intelligence and many demeaning nicknames to name but a few. All the advantages of white people apparently. Or a history of their ethnic group as bad as any.
It's just not as bad as being black. Nowhere near.
"I'll fetch me dad."
"Ah yes, and I'll fetch mine, my dad's heavyweight champion of the world, so what will your dad do then, eh?"
You must be good at something. By the law of averages. But debating the real world/common sense sure ain't it. Find something else, go on.
Your continued inability to argue the point is noted.
Edit: It's knowledge of the "real world" that tells you Black people face discrimination far worse than Irish people.
It's impossible to argue any point with someone who:
a) appears to have no concept of the real world,
b) steadfastly refuses to acknowledge any other viewpoint other than their own,
c) appears to form opinions based on what they read in the left-wing media,
d) is in constant denial as to what's staring them in the face.
What's your opinion on the Birmingham school(s) scandal, for instance? Your lot have kept very quiet on that one.
Edit: I've inadvertently described the average Labour 'politician' right there!
Irish people?? Who mentioned them? Some of us keep our heritage quiet because it's irrelevant now. Sligeach Abú if that keeps you happy.
Do they?
Is there an Irish Police Officers Association?
There's a Black one.
And you could write a list of others.
http://www.policefed-ni.org.uk/default.aspx
http://www.gra.cc/
If you actually really think that the Irish have suffered discrimination as badly as Black people you are simply not living in the real world.
Not I don't but there were many simarlaties.
And that link is to a federation, nothing to do with colour.
You didn't ask for anything to do with colour.
Well you seem to know little of the Irish slave trade, or for that matter the Scottish Covenanter's sent to slave in the West Indies. The popular view of the Irish and the stereotypes illustrated in all the papers, pamphlets, books and publications are there for all to see as the criminal, bestial, primitive person. The colour of his skin was no route to redemption in the eyes of those who so described him.
The Indians sent abroad by Empire as indentured servants worked in exactly the same conditions of brutality, coercion and ownership as the Irish and the religious prisoners did and in exactly the same enforced or 'voluntary' arrangements.
You are observing the history of white people in the modern context of skin colour as opposed to the historic context that excluded from 'white' many ethnic white groups such as the Irish, Scottish Gael and even religious groups as well as the total exclusion of the lower orders who included the 'criminal classes'. With most of these peoples having spent many generations trying to escape the torture of the treadmill, both real and metaphorical, it is insulting for them to be now told they have a history of advantage and pampering and it is time to step aside and make way for the underprivileged. If you believe that will happen with meek obedience then I believe you are mistaken.
The latest scandal as regards the possibility of drug trials on Irish babies in the 30s is just another example of the viewpoint about certain groups/classes being expendable.