Current Affairs King Charles III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Running a 'charity', i'd assume it's for evasive/tax purposes. LOTS of money is unaccounted for according to records.

A 'charity' that only helps the blackest of black women. If you're mixed race or god forbid - white... Find somewhere else.

But an old woman, tasked with the job to ask questions is the racist.

Eh what?

Have you any evidence she is avoiding taxes? Or that her motivation for doing so is to avoid taxes?

What is the "blackest of black" women?

And why is a woman's job to racially abuse people who a racist line of questioning? Why is that deemed appropriate.

Being old doesnt get you off being racist.
 
Look mate, I'm 85, brought up in Bradford ffs.
When I was a kid there were no poc around.
When they started to arrive when I was in my teens they were all from somewhere overseas a long way away.
Now 30% ov the population of that city are poc. Most of them born there. They are bradfordians, yorkies, British. But an ignorant old dear of of the royal Court may still ask them where they come from despite their accent.
She acknowledged her error and apologised for it.

Well if she has apologised for it, why are people saying she did nothing wrong?

And shes not an ignorant old dear. Shes a racist, plain and simple. The question ought to be asked, why has a racist had a job for 62 years?
 
Last edited:
Her names?

Ngozi Headley;
Ngozi Headley-Fulani;
Marlene Headley;
Marlene Fulani;
Mary Headley;
Mary Fulani;
Mary Headley-Fulani; or
Sister Ngozi.

I am suggesting that she is British but of Caribbean heritage. She has chosen to appropriate an African name to support her grift.

That she goes under eight or so different names should be a red flag to anyone looking at this objectively - particularly when these aliases are attached to bidding for grants etc. She is a race baiting grifter.

Shocking that she refused to help a young mixed race woman because she was too white. We need less of these types of people and its not helpful when those with an agenda try and excuse such wrongdoing to support a view.

You seem a bit obsessed with this woman, in a bit of a stalker way to be honest.

Why do you care how many names she has? What difference does it make to you? Has she registered these names somewhere?

Women who marry 4 or 5 times, and change their names, are they also grifters who draw your ire?

Can you also explain how she is a race baiter? More than say, someone echoing the views of the National Front is a race baiter? Do you think, a black person can be British, or from Hackney for example?

What "type" of people do we need less of? Black women who work in the VAWG sector, giving specialist support to other black women? If so, why do we need less of these?

What agenda are you accusing people of? Do you mean the right wing media, hounding a black charity worker because she reported racial abuse?
 
What's happened to him? He seemed to drop Orwell in and then said he didnt know why people liked Orwell the last time I spoke to him.
Depends on the day, catch him on the crack and he's fairly lucid, a pcp day and its helter-chuffin-skelter!

Back to the 'problem at the palace' or whichever property, theres a rather sizable problem in play - how did the lady racially abused know to take a recorder to capture the audio? How many times has the best old dear around been guilty of this sort of thing previous? She's got form and the liz truss voters are trying anything to focus the ire on the victim.

1671373943184.webp
 
Errm, why do you think it was alcohol fuelled? It was just a question, as you seemed to be accusing a black person, who has suffered racist abuse of being a "race baiter". I'm not sure what a race baiter is in that context, so just asked.
She did not suffer racist abuse. Only a racist minded person would see the situation through that lense.

She has tried to make a situation that she now admits was nothing to do race an issue relating to race. Even Marlene accepts this now.

Where is your evidence that the woman was dodgy?
Read the thread.

Is her skin colour a factor in you arriving at this decision?
Not in the slightest.

Continually harangiung a person of colour, insinuating they are not British, even after they have answered they are from Hackney, is wholly unacceptable. Pray tell, how would you want her to answer?
Given that even she acknowledges it was not in any way a racist question it woud have been much better if she had answered in a way that did not try and paint it as if the woman asking was a racist. She was just manipulating the situation in a way to get advantage - race baiting.

If I were you, I'd avoid giving people lectures about allegedly being drunk, or rambling, when you're calling a black woman who was racially abused racist.
If I were you I would not have suggested as you did. if it was not a drinken ramble then i'd say you are a barmpot.

Or making a comparison to someone saying you looked like Bruce Willis or whatever. That is rambling.
I described a situation in which someone hearing that I was from a western country assumed that I'd know Bruce Willis. I did not mention race and it was a direct comparison of a situation in which I have been repeatedly asked about where I was from, nothing confused or rambling in that.

And why is somebody with a job to "screen" people of colour, asking them 17 times where they are from, even after they have answered. Do you think this is an acceptable role to have? Why do people of colour need to be "screened" in such a way? Why couldn't she accept that she was from Hackney?
Why do you want a routine situation in that situation to be racist? Why are you trying to suggest that routine screening in prep for an intro was only applicable to 'black' people? Did all of the 'black' people at the event scream racism when screened? Do you hate the royal family? Do you want to see the UK as a racist country? Do you hate white people?

Why do you think she is as "dodgy as hell" to answer in the manner she did?
I think she is as dodgy as hell as she has used about 8 different names to apply for funding for her charity and business and has very serious questions about the validity of the approach taken and use of the funds raised.

For the situation she has all but acknowledged that she was race baiting. Why would you want to concdone race baiting is probably more of a question for yourself to reflect upon.

Do you think black people cant be British?
That is such a stupid question I just leave by saying that it is beyond ignorant to have typed that.

You're not coming across very well here mate.
Lol
 
You seem a bit obsessed with this woman, in a bit of a stalker way to be honest.
You seem to want to find words to close my position on the matter. Typical of a certain type.

Why do you care how many names she has? What difference does it make to you? Has she registered these names somewhere?
Read the thread
Women who marry 4 or 5 times, and change their names, are they also grifters who draw your ire?
You are completely ignoring the context again. Is this on purpose?

Can you also explain how she is a race baiter? More than say, someone echoing the views of the National Front is a race baiter?
Read the thread

Do you think, a black person can be British, or from Hackney for example?
Again, this is beyond ignorant.

What "type" of people do we need less of?
Racists and race baiters

Black women who work in the VAWG sector, giving specialist support to other black women? If so, why do we need less of these?
Another stupid question.

What agenda are you accusing people of? Do you mean the right wing media, hounding a black charity worker because she reported racial abuse?
Marlene has accepted that it was in no way racist. Most rational people saw this from the off. Probably more to the point to ask that given that Marlene has admitted it wasn't racism why are you still tryin to make out it was? Actually I can't be bothered with more of your ignorant loaded points so I'll leave you to your racism.
 
She did not suffer racist abuse. Only a racist minded person would see the situation through that lense.

She has tried to make a situation that she now admits was nothing to do race an issue relating to race. Even Marlene accepts this now.


Read the thread.


Not in the slightest.


Given that even she acknowledges it was not in any way a racist question it woud have been much better if she had answered in a way that did not try and paint it as if the woman asking was a racist. She was just manipulating the situation in a way to get advantage - race baiting.


If I were you I would not have suggested as you did. if it was not a drinken ramble then i'd say you are a barmpot.


I described a situation in which someone hearing that I was from a western country assumed that I'd know Bruce Willis. I did not mention race and it was a direct comparison of a situation in which I have been repeatedly asked about where I was from, nothing confused or rambling in that.


Why do you want a routine situation in that situation to be racist? Why are you trying to suggest that routine screening in prep for an intro was only applicable to 'black' people? Did all of the 'black' people at the event scream racism when screened? Do you hate the royal family? Do you want to see the UK as a racist country? Do you hate white people?


I think she is as dodgy as hell as she has used about 8 different names to apply for funding for her charity and business and has very serious questions about the validity of the approach taken and use of the funds raised.

For the situation she has all but acknowledged that she was race baiting. Why would you want to concdone race baiting is probably more of a question for yourself to reflect upon.


That is such a stupid question I just leave by saying that it is beyond ignorant to have typed that.


Lol

The Palace have already acknowledged its racist. Any reasonable minded person knows its racist to continually harangue a person of colour about not being from Britain. You throw about being a barn pot, but look, only hardened racists would view this line of attack as acceptable. Even the Monarchy have accepted its racist!

It wasnt a drunken rant. It was a question to you, because you use a lot of language which is a bit dubious. Likewise, that you think I'd be a barn pot, or drunk, to think that continually asking a black woman where she is from, after shes already told you, is alarming. You seem a reasonable poster for the most part, so I dont understand the blind spot here, or the idea that it is acceptable.

Even if you dont like the woman, asking her 17 times where she is from, and not accepting her answer that she was born in Britain is not acceptable, on any level. You dont need to be drunk, or a bar pot to see it.

Re Bruce Willis, its just not comparable. It's a bizarre comparison. I went to New York recently, and an elderly couple asked me if I knew Winston Churchill and the Queen. It was quite a sweet, amusing moment, with no malice attached. Yes it was ludicrous, but I can understand there is no racial undertones in that. You're a smart guy, you know the difference.

Can you direct me to where she has admitted race baiting? Or what race baiting even is to you? I have criticised race baiting (by the member of staff, refusing to accept a black woman was British). I am not condoning it at all, so I'm a bit lost on that.

Re the final point, it is a ludicrous question in the abstract, but given your responses it makes sense. Have you said anything critical about a black person being asked 17 times where she is from, after someone refused to accept they were born in Britain. We can agree that is wrong cant we? Or do you sympathise with that line of questioning/thinking.

I genuinely dont know. You seem a very rational and erudite guy, but I'm just checking we are at least on the same page on the big, important questions. It may be that you agree with Lady Hussey though, you dont think they can be British, in which case theres no point discussing it further with you, as we just wont find any common ground.

If you do think they can be British, which I'll work on the assumption you do, it is perhaps worth considering why they would have to prove that on 17 occasions from a single conversation? You dont have to like the woman, or know her name to see that this isnt acceptable.

Or maybe you dont, and I'm drunk and a barn pot for thinking that is an irrelevant and unacceptable line of questioning to a woman who was born in Hackney.
 
You seem to want to find words to close my position on the matter. Typical of a certain type.


Read the thread

You are completely ignoring the context again. Is this on purpose?


Read the thread


Again, this is beyond ignorant.


Racists and race baiters


Another stupid question.


Marlene has accepted that it was in no way racist. Most rational people saw this from the off. Probably more to the point to ask that given that Marlene has admitted it wasn't racism why are you still tryin to make out it was? Actually I can't be bothered with more of your ignorant loaded points so I'll leave you to your racism.

What type am I typical of then?

What context am I missing? What relevance is it that a woman changes her name?

I've read the thread, I dont see what relevance it is to being asked 17 times where she is from, having given a satisfactory answer, how many names she has? She could have 1000 names, she is still British isnt she?

Why is it a stupid question to ask why we need less black women offering tailored support in the VAWG sector? The evidence would suggest we need more women doing this.

The Palace has already accepted it was racist. It doesnt matter what I think, it has already been established it was.

Can you please explain to me, where I have been racist? Or are you just going to keep having a tantrum? What race of people have I been racist against? In your head, is stating its unacceptable for black people to be asked 17 times where they are from, racist? I'm struggling to see it mate.

But anyway, you keep going with your tantrum, we can add racist, to barnpot, to drunk. Have you perhaps considered, that it may be that people find it uncomfortable that a black person is asked 17 times where they are from, told they must be from Africa and that this is a bit different to someone asking if you knew Bruce Willis? You may want to entertain that possibility before having another hissy fit.
 
Depends on the day, catch him on the crack and he's fairly lucid, a pcp day and its helter-chuffin-skelter!

Back to the 'problem at the palace' or whichever property, theres a rather sizable problem in play - how did the lady racially abused know to take a recorder to capture the audio? How many times has the best old dear around been guilty of this sort of thing previous? She's got form and the liz truss voters are trying anything to focus the ire on the victim.

View attachment 197123

It's a reasonable question, but to me it is not critical. It was like when Keys and Gray got caught out, and tried to make a big thing about the people recording. If you dont say cringeworthy/racist/sexist things, you will not get caught out.

It was lucky that woman took a recording device really.
 
It's a reasonable question, but to me it is not critical. It was like when Keys and Gray got caught out, and tried to make a big thing about the people recording. If you dont say cringeworthy/racist/sexist things, you will not get caught out.

It was lucky that woman took a recording device really.
I wasn't blaming her, I reckon she'd been tipped off...
 
Eh what?

Have you any evidence she is avoiding taxes? Or that her motivation for doing so is to avoid taxes?

What is the "blackest of black" women?

And why is a woman's job to racially abuse people who a racist line of questioning? Why is that deemed appropriate.

Being old doesnt get you off being racist.

Where do I start with this.

I know, right - I usually enjoy your posts and agree with a lot you say, but you're having a mare here.

Ok, so avoiding taxes. Her charity is being investigated by The Charity Commission regarding finances. Safe to assume she has aliases due to fraudulent activities. People who aren't up to no good, don't need multiple aliases.

The 'blackest of black women' are women untarnished with any white heritage. If you are of mixed race or white needing help - 'Sistah Space' turns you away (plenty of accusations documented online)

'And why is a woman's job to racially abuse people who a racist line of questioning? Why is that deemed appropriate.' That doesn't make sense mate. Her job was to ask questions regarding who she is, where she's from and what she's doing at the party - so she can relay it to the future Queen Consort, so she's not blindsided and ignorant to what Ngozi Fulani is doing there. Quite simple really.

Asking someone where they are from isn't racist. Asking someone where they are 'really' from isn't racist. It's an old woman asking what's your heritage, as you've turned up wearing full African attire and talking with a cockney accent. This is Fulani not wanting the awkward conversation of saying she in fact isn't African, has no African heritage, Ngozi Fulani isn't actually her real name and she's there to plug a racist Charity that hand-picks who it helps dependent on the colour of your skin.

As for 'being old doesn't get you off being racist' I agree wholeheartedly. However it does give explanation to actions. My wife's Gran still uses the term 'coloured'. She isn't racist, she just doesn't know any better as the world has moved on, and the word is now deemed inappropriate, whereas in the 70's and 80's, it was fine. She just doesn't have enough interaction regarding the subject matter to know any better.

Now you can say 'ignorance isn't an excuse', but you'd be wrong. Ignorance is an excuse until you know better, then it can't be used as an excuse.



Now you're going to say 'if she wasn't being racist why did she apologise'... She took it on the chin for the good of the 'institution'. She de-escalated the situation by giving the actual racist what she wanted, her 15 minutes of fame and a plug on every single TV channel including filming the 'apology'.
 
Where do I start with this.

I know, right - I usually enjoy your posts and agree with a lot you say, but you're having a mare here.

Ok, so avoiding taxes. Her charity is being investigated by The Charity Commission regarding finances. Safe to assume she has aliases due to fraudulent activities. People who aren't up to no good, don't need multiple aliases.

The 'blackest of black women' are women untarnished with any white heritage. If you are of mixed race or white needing help - 'Sistah Space' turns you away (plenty of accusations documented online)

'And why is a woman's job to racially abuse people who a racist line of questioning? Why is that deemed appropriate.' That doesn't make sense mate. Her job was to ask questions regarding who she is, where she's from and what she's doing at the party - so she can relay it to the future Queen Consort, so she's not blindsided and ignorant to what Ngozi Fulani is doing there. Quite simple really.

Asking someone where they are from isn't racist. Asking someone where they are 'really' from isn't racist. It's an old woman asking what's your heritage, as you've turned up wearing full African attire and talking with a cockney accent. This is Fulani not wanting the awkward conversation of saying she in fact isn't African, has no African heritage, Ngozi Fulani isn't actually her real name and she's there to plug a racist Charity that hand-picks who it helps dependent on the colour of your skin.

As for 'being old doesn't get you off being racist' I agree wholeheartedly. However it does give explanation to actions. My wife's Gran still uses the term 'coloured'. She isn't racist, she just doesn't know any better as the world has moved on, and the word is now deemed inappropriate, whereas in the 70's and 80's, it was fine. She just doesn't have enough interaction regarding the subject matter to know any better.

Now you can say 'ignorance isn't an excuse', but you'd be wrong. Ignorance is an excuse until you know better, then it can't be used as an excuse.



Now you're going to say 'if she wasn't being racist why did she apologise'... She took it on the chin for the good of the 'institution'. She de-escalated the situation by giving the actual racist what she wanted, her 15 minutes of fame and a plug on every single TV channel including filming the 'apology'.

I appreciate the response. To come back on points made.

I dont know about financial irregularities, this is reasonably common in both businesses and unfortunately charities. I'll await the outcome of the findings, but if she has been steaking funds that's not good.

It's my understanding that she has set up a refuge for black women. I'm not sure why this is a bad idea. To me, it's a good idea. They need refuge space, and feel unsafe in mixed spaces. It's a bit like female refuges now have to admit men, all in the name of some liberal notion of "equality". To me, I can understand why people would want to have specific black only spaces. We have black only spaces in the police force, on political organisations, in work spaces etc. It was a key recommendation of the Mcpherson report, so I dont see how shes dojg anything wrong.

I mean she can ask, but its not her job to ask 17 times, and decide the answer isnt correct. She told her the organisation she was from. That wasnt good enough. She then told her she was born in the UK, that wasnt good enough. She the told her lives in Hackney, that wasnt good enough. She then told her she must be born in Africa, was told that wasnt the case, and still decided that wasnt good enough.

Why is she making the decision that this woman cant be British? Or cant live in Hackney? On who's authority is she making this decision? I'm afraid, I cant see any rational reason, why either an individual, or an institution would feel the need to do this.

I think what the woman wanted, was not to be racially abused, with wholly inappropriate questioning, and have her citizenship called into question. She, and the institution of the monarchy apologised for racism, because they were racist.

That's reasonable enough, but it's only a start for me. I would like to know, how often she has been racist in such a manner, who was aware of her line of questioning, and how she has managed to stay employed for over 60 years showing these views. It's good she has apologised, but further questions need to be asked.

As a final aside, I appreciate some people may not agree with the need for protective spaces for black women, but why invite her? They had already shown they agreed with her work, and supported her organisation by choosing to invite her. If there are problems with her org, then surely we need to know who made that call as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top