Friday, 9 August 2013

The class sneaks

On 4 February 2009, Melanie Phillips said this in The Daily Mail:
“Sometimes you have to pinch yourself to remember that Britain has historically always been the cradle of liberty. For today we seem to be sliding inexorably into a culture of control which would have been very familiar to the Stasi or the KGB..

Carol Thatcher, the daughter of former Prime Minister Lady Thatcher, now faces being banned from the BBC after reportedly referring to an unnamed tennis player as reminding her of a 'GOLLIWOG'.
Carol... has been a regular presenter on The One Show - a daily magazine programme on BBC One - for three years and is described as part of the family on the BBC website. But yesterday the BBC threw her out by announcing in the wake of the 'golliwog' row that it now had 'no plans' to use her again in her regular presenting slot...

Her friends say that all she did was to compare the player's hairstyle to the 'Robertson's Golly' which once adorned that company's jars of jam and marmalade. But without knowing the context in which she made this remark - and the tone in which it was said - none of us can judge what to make of it.

And that surely is the point. For the really disturbing thing about this episode - unlike that involving Jonathan Ross, who deeply offended millions in public, had to have an apology dragged out of him and kept his £18million job - is not so much the remark itself but the fact that Carol Thatcher made it in private... 
She made the remark after several drinks in the show's hospitality room to the Presenter Adrian Chiles, who is said to have been 'outraged' by it. So outraged that it seems it is being used to hang her out to dry. But it was a remark made in the course of a private conversation - which has now been used to sack her after someone involved in that lighthearted banter passed it on to bbc executives in the form of a complaint.

It is the BBC's reaction which is really shocking and offensive, together with the behaviour of the person who turned in ms thatcher to the corporation's commissars.

It is hard to think of anything more despicable than snitching like this on a private conversation... Is there anyone who can honestly claim never to have uttered an injudicious remark when sharing a drink with friends?...

To seek to enforce codes of behaviour in private relationships is totally coercive and illiberal. Yet that is precisely what has happened in the case of Carol Thatcher. By reporting her remark to the BBC hierarchy - and who knows whether or not it was distorted or taken out of context in the lodging of this complaint - her disloyal and sneaky colleagues took an axe to her right to privacy.

The implications are deeply disturbing. For such behaviour means that no one can ever relax with colleagues for fear that one of them might go running to the boss to complain. It destroys the freedom to speak in private for fear that this might be used to cast you into outer darkness for having a view which falls foul of some arbitrary definition of what is acceptable. After all, no offence could possibly have been given to the unnamed tennis player or the public at large because the remark was not broadcast.

This is, in fact, the second time in just a few days in which someone has found herself facing the sack for behaviour which has caused no actual offence but where charges have been laid by officious colleagues enforcing an oppressive code of behaviour. community nurse Caroline Petrie offered to pray for an elderly patient who was being treated at home. The following day, Mrs Petrie was confronted over her offer by a nursing sister. The day after that, she was told that she was suspended while disciplinary action would be taken against her which might lead to the sack.

But although the patient had turned down her offer of a prayer, she said she was not the slightest bit offended and certainly had not made a complaint. As with Carol Thatcher, it was this nurse's colleagues who were offended that Mrs Petrie had transgressed codes of 'equality and diversity' - which apparently preclude a nurse offering the Christian solace of prayer. And it was professional colleagues, both in that nhs trust and in the bbc, who took it upon themselves to enforce those approved attitudes from which there can be no deviation.

Mr Ross's offence is that in sick language he offended the elderly. Old, white, middle-class people don't really count for much in the BBC mindset. Ms Thatcher's alleged offence involved race - which to the BBC constitutes the most heinous crime of all.

Such political correctness is now the governing characteristic of public sector institutions such as the BBC and the NHS, along with an intelligentsia determined upon a draconian process of social engineering aimed at changing not just society but human nature itself.

Ostensibly designed to protect disadvantaged groups, it is actually all about advertising the moral purity of those who enforce it. It's a dogma enforced with the zealotry of a secular inquisition and is profoundly totalitarian in character. Indeed, behaviour such as this has always been a key feature of police states and totalitarian regimes.

THE STASI OR THE KGB GAINED MUCH OF THEIR POWER OVER THE POPULATION THEY TYRANNISED BY GETTING PEOPLE TO INFORM ON EACH OTHER, using such informers to bring forward evidence of 'THOUGHT CRIMES' from private or overheard conversations. Such use of informers SETS PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER in a climate of permanent and corrosive suspicion. Destroying the trust which is the basis of relationships, it is thus A PRINCIPAL MEANS OF CONTROLLING THE POPULATION.

In Communist regimes, Stasi and KGB informers and apparatchiks designated dissidents, religious believers and other free spirits as enemies of the state.

IN POLITICALLY CORRECT BRITAIN, BBC informers and NHS apparatchiks designate jovially gabby broadcasters and Christian nurses as enemies of society, to be summarily convicted by kangaroo courts of conformist bureaucrats and banished in opprobrium and disgust.

It's all part of a wider trend. the police 'hate crime' division urges the public to inform on anyone who expresses an opinion they deem hateful to the usual range of disadvantaged groups…

It is this combination of lunacy and coercion which leads one to think that the land of those great apostles of free thinking, John Milton and John Locke, is fast turning into A NIGHTMARE STRAIGHT OUT OF THE PAGES OF GEORGE ORWELL OR FRANZ KAFKA"
The age of the snitch

Well said, Melanie.

You're not my favourite person, love, but boy-oh-boy do you sometimes get it right.

On 18 August 2003, The Birmingham Evening Mail published a very informative article. It told us everything we need to know about one ghastly, PC wagtail.
"In The Colour of Friendship, Adrian begins by looking through his wedding album and realising how many white faces are in it.

'I don't seem to have any close friends who don't have the same colour of skin as me,' says the presenter for BBC2's Working Lunch. 'Is it normal? Is it wrong? Is it odd? More of us live next door to other cultures than ever before, but that's not making us friends'...

Adrian, who is married to Five Live colleague Jane Garvey, adds: 'I WANT ALL THE SPECIES TO MARRY EACH OTHER SO THAT IN 300 YEARS' TIME WE ARE ALL THE SAME COLOUR... I would love my daughter to marry an Asian or black man'."
The Colour of Friendship

So, Adrian Chiles wants us 'all to be the same colour' in 300 years time. Well, we won’t be, pal. There will still be black, there will still be yellow and there will be many shades of brown but, if ghastly PC airheads like you get their way there will no longer be a white race for everyone else to blame their failings on.

Your Evening Mail quotation reminds me of what another media darling said during the 4 June 2006 edition of Dateline London. Gavin Essler posed this question to the ubiquitous Ugandan Asian journalist, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown:
"What's wrong with white guys, by the way?"
To which she replied:
Alibhai-Brown was awarded an MBE in 2001 'for services to journalism.'

Trust me, ladies and gents, Chiles’ knighthood won’t be long in coming if the Stasi are still in power a few years down the line.

I wonder why our Mel didn't mention the other celebrity in the green room when Carole went golliwog? The comedienne, Jo Brand, was there as well. When Ms Thatcher described the French tennis player, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, as a 'half-golliwog frog,' Brand, apparently, left the room in disgust

The disgusted person is, as we speak, being investigated by the cops for a remark she made during a live show in Hammersmith. As a result of the British National Party's membership list being made public, a clearly delighted Brand said this:
"Let's start with some important political news. Did you hear this, right, that BNP members and supporters have had their names and addresses published on the internet? Hurrah! Now we know who to send the poo to!"
The following day, Simon Darby, the BNP's deputy leader, made an official complaint saying that her comment had been an act of racial incitement. Which, of course, is silly. But it's the kind of b***ocks Jo Brand, Adrian Chiles and the PC Crowd at the BBC level at decent Brits all the time so what's good for the goose is good for the gander, I guess.

The BBC, who broadcast the show in the slot temporarily vacated by Jonathan Ross, chose not to edit out Brand's offensive remarks. All of whichd oesn't tell us why Ms Philips makes no mention of Ms Brand in her article. I don't suppose the fact that they're both Jewish would have anything to do with it.

On 2 December 2005, Jane Garvey, Adrian Chiles' wife at the time, put this extraordinary question to Chief Constable Peter Fahey on her Radio 5 Live show:
It isn't too difficult to see why the careers of this fine PC pair progressed so rapidly at the BBC, is it?

For those who are as sensitively opaque to indigenous suffering as Garvey appears to be, check out The Rogues' Gallery.

Adrian Chiles' mother, Ljerka, came to England in the 1950s to work as an au pair. She is Croatian.

As for the Caroline Petrie affair, well, we must make a note of the name Alison Withers.

Caroline's boss wrote to her thus:
"As a nurse you are required to uphold the reputation of your profession. Your Nursing Midwifery Council code states that ‘YOU MUST DEMONSTRATE A PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL COMMITMENT TO EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY’ and ‘you must NOT use your professional status to promote causes that are not related to health'."
As Richard Littlejohn asked in The Daily Mail:
"What is so heinous about Mrs Petrie praying for her patients?"
He supplied the answer thus:
"The truth is that Christianity forms no part of the 'diversity' agenda. the only religion that official Britain recognises is 'diversity' itself.  The NHS, like every single one of our institutions, long ago fell to the Guardianistas, who pursue their agenda with a deranged zeal.

While they genuflect to Islam and 'respect' every oddball religion from paganism to devil-worship, they despise Britain's Judeo-Christian tradition and use every extent of their powers to crush it. It's only Christianity which is singled out for such vilification, as with the airport worker suspended for wearing a crucifix and the devout Christian registrar threatened with the sack for refusing to perform homosexual marriages.

What kind of sick society have we become where self-righteous sneaks can ruin someone's career?

There's only one word to describe hatchet-faced harridans like administrator Alison Withers and the tell-tale creeps trying to get a dedicated nurse such as Caroline Petrie sacked for dispensing a little Christian kindness. Sick.”
Well said, that man! Alison Withers says that a good nurse must 'demonstrate a personal and professional commitment to equality and diversity.' She then, without a hint of irony, proceeds to insist that said nurse must not use her 'professional status to promote causes that are not related to health.'

Like equality and diversity, perhaps?

I wonder if, in Alison Withers' tiny, teletubbie mind, she sincerely believes that Christianity is 'not related to health' and equality and diversity are? Whatever, write down the name Alison Withers alongside those of Adrian Chiles and Jo Brand. At some point in the near future we will need to ask them why they were so offended by a joke and a prayer.

UPDATE: On 8 February 2009, Carol Thatcher’s agent, Ali Gunn,was quoted thus by The Sunday Express:
“It’s been an awful time. We've even had death threats. I’ve been involved in some high-profile things in my career but nothing like this.”
Ladies and gentlemen, let's see if you can work out the difference between the way THEY say it is and the way it really is. On the one hand, those who represent the PC Crowd, the Stalinists and the foreigner issue death threats to Ms Thatcher. On the other hand, those who despise political correctness, would put the British first in their own homeland and are continually demonised by the PC Crowd, the Stalinists and the foreigner for daring to say so, have behaved in an entirely civil fashion towards Adrian Chiles and Jo Brand.

Ali Gunn continued:
“I’m shocked at the reaction to this. It’s absolutely stupid… It is quite amazing how the BBC has managed after a week to ‘discover’ all these witnesses. Given recent events, THERE SEEMS TO BE ONE RULE AT THE BBC FOR ONE AND ANOTHER FOR OTHERS...

If there wasn’t an agenda against Carol then why the double standards at the BBC? It’s Punch and Judy politics and there’s one rule for Carol and another for Jeremy.” (Top Gear presenter, Jeremy Clarkson, recently called Gordon Brown a 'one-eyed Scottish idiot.' Following his apology the BBC said it would not take any action against him)
Ali added:
“We’ve got nothing against Jeremy, but as with Jonathan Ross, other people get away with much worse at the BBC but Carol is punished for something said in private while others can say what they want in public.”
The Sunday Express added:
“In another twist, Miss Thatcher insisted she had apologised for the remark before news of it became public. BBC1 Controller Jay Hunt said Miss Thatcher had not apologised sufficiently, claiming she was given five days to do so but refused. However, fresh details reveal an apology was made to The One Show’s executive producer Tessa Finch last Monday, a day before the story broke. The BBC admits an apology was received but Mr Hunt said: ‘She has apologised but has maintained throughout that it was jokey. It clearly was not said in a jokey way’."
Which is a lie. Carol Thatcher’s whole personna is jolly, jokey and, fractionally air-headed. The remark is one she would have made light-heartedly, without thought or malice. But the Jay Hunts do not care about that. The PC Crowd’s sacred, racial cow had been dissed.

As for the apology, this is what Jay Hunt, actually said:
“We have given Carol ample opportunity to offer a fulsome and unconditional apology for the offence that she caused to those individuals, and to the wider production team who were offended by what she said, and she's chosen not to do so”.
Jay Hunt was lying then. An apology WAS made, as she has now admitted.

The Sunday Express continued:
“Miss Thatcher… made the comment in front of comedian Jo Brand and One Show presenter Adrian Chiles after a recording of the show. Chiles and Brand are understood to have been the only others in the green room, where show participants relax. They are said to have challenged her about the comment before it filtered out to the production team.”
This is interesting. Either The Express has its facts wrong or Jay Hunt has been caught out in another lie. On 5 February Ms Hunt said this on Radio 4's Today programme:
“She was in the Green Room which was populated by approximately 12 people… It wasn't a private conversation... What Carol decides to say in the privacy of her own home or in a private conversation with friends is one thing. What she says in a Green Room space, where they are 12 people present… is a rather different thing'.
I wonder who’s telling the truth here, Hunt or The Sunday Express?Perhaps Ms Hunt clarified the matter a tad herself, when she added:
"She was in a conversation which was overheard specifically by three individuals - Adrian Chiles, Jo Brand and a senior charity worker from Comic Relief."
Which, if this is true, is a 'rather different thing' to the implication, implied twice that 12 people might have overheard the conversation.

Thing is, The Express seems pretty sure that Brand and Chiles were the only others in the Green Room. Hunt states categorically that there were twelve people altogether. Either she’s lying again or The Sunday Express has got its facts wrong. My money’s on the person who has already demonstrated that she has a bit of a problem with the actualité.

Ms Hunt also said that 'people were hugely offended.' I wonder if these 'people' deemed the golliwog remark more offensive than the actual sacking. You see, as of 8 February, 3,348 viewers had complained to the BBC about Carol’s dismissal and only 133 had registered their support for it.

Perhaps Jennette Arnold, a Labour member of the London Assembly, was one of the 133. This was her two penneth:
“The symbolism of the golliwog is colonialist, racist and harks back to time when black people were dismissed as slave, servant, and figures of fun. It is an image associated with the demeaning of black people. THERE ARE NO SECOND CHANCES WHEN ANYONE IN PUBLIC LIFE USES SUCH OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE.”
Thus spake a New Labour Commissar. Actually, Jennette, I can think of someone who has been given a 'second chance.' Jonathan Ross was given a second chance. Interestingly, it was Jay Hunt who gave him that chance. This was her reasoning:
“Jonathan, as soon as he overstepped the mark, was completely clear that he needed to apologise, and he apologised publicly. He said immediately that he was sorry for the offence he had caused.”
Once again, Ms Hunt has been caught out in a lie. After Ross left an obscene message on Andrew Sachs’ answer phone, which included the phrase 'he (Russell Brand) f*cked your granddaughter,' it took the BBC nine days before an apology of any kind was proffered. It took Jonathan Ross TEN DAYS before to write an apology to him. It was a full 21 DAYS before the BBC broadcast their apology to the nation as a whole.

Ross is now back at work as if nothing had happened.

Jay Hunt also said this during the Radio 4 interview:
"Jo Brand was offended at the time. Adrian was offended at the time, and THEY DECIDED TO RAISE IT WITH THE EXECUTIVE PRODUCER."
Class sneaks then. And yet both sneaks have since insisted that Carol Thatcher's dismissal had nothing to do with them. Typical behaviour for your sneaky sort don't you think. The class sneaks are pictured below alongside the youthful, Australian-born Controller of the BBC.

Anyone out there wondering how Ms Hunt got the job?

Well, I don't know what her political allegiances are but Jo Brand and Adrian Chiles are both died-in-the-wool New Labour luvvies. You don't have to be a genius to figure out she might be similarly inclined.

No comments:

Post a Comment