Policeman in Trouble for Using the Phase "Whiter than White"
Discussion
FiF said:
Red 4 said:
You want a copy of the letter allegedly sent to this poster's nan in the 90's ?
Only in the land of PH ... (You should get out more).
But it is Pothole, don't forget that, been in the "put in sack, hit with sticks repeatedly" list since the millennium.Only in the land of PH ... (You should get out more).
ETA: This story from the BBC suggests that progress had been made by 2000 at least:
Edited by Pothole on Monday 17th September 15:53
WinstonWolf said:
smn159 said:
Russian Troll Bot said:
So given they've confirmed an Officer is being investigated for an "alleged use of language deliberately intended to offend and that had racist undertones." I'm not sure where the made up part comes from?
Do you think that statement supports the overall 'Political Correctness gone mad' tone of the article then?The use of racist language deliberately intended to offend by a senior officer should be investigated, I would have though?
The article is spun to suggest that the guy said something fairly innocent and in being investigated just because of that. The article has no named sources, no direct quotes, no context... A reasonable person might conclude that it is written in that way to play to the prejudices of the readers... unless you have more information?
It doesn't take a genius to work out that there's more to this than the headline.
I'll pick a scenario out of the air...
Senior officer doing a briefing says "we need to be whiter than white" then immediately follows it up with "easier said than done eh" directed at the only black/Asian officer in the room.
Now I'm not saying for one second this is what happened, but something like that would surely land you in trouble.
And to dismiss it without knowing the full facts (as is often the case on here) is a bit silly.
I'll pick a scenario out of the air...
Senior officer doing a briefing says "we need to be whiter than white" then immediately follows it up with "easier said than done eh" directed at the only black/Asian officer in the room.
Now I'm not saying for one second this is what happened, but something like that would surely land you in trouble.
And to dismiss it without knowing the full facts (as is often the case on here) is a bit silly.
Pothole said:
FiF said:
Red 4 said:
You want a copy of the letter allegedly sent to this poster's nan in the 90's ?
Only in the land of PH ... (You should get out more).
But it is Pothole, don't forget that, been in the "put in sack, hit with sticks repeatedly" list since the millennium.Only in the land of PH ... (You should get out more).
ETA: This story from the BBC suggests that progress had been made by 2000 at least:
Edited by Pothole on Monday 17th September 15:53
Maybe you do.
wjb said:
It doesn't take a genius to work out that there's more to this than the headline.
I'll pick a scenario out of the air...
Senior officer doing a briefing says "we need to be whiter than white" then immediately follows it up with "easier said than done eh" directed at the only black/Asian officer in the room.
Now I'm not saying for one second this is what happened, but something like that would surely land you in trouble.
And to dismiss it without knowing the full facts (as is often the case on here) is a bit silly.
I'll pick a scenario out of the air...
Senior officer doing a briefing says "we need to be whiter than white" then immediately follows it up with "easier said than done eh" directed at the only black/Asian officer in the room.
Now I'm not saying for one second this is what happened, but something like that would surely land you in trouble.
And to dismiss it without knowing the full facts (as is often the case on here) is a bit silly.
There's always more to it - and it always comes out quietly once the easily outraged "pc gone mad" masses have move on to something else.
gizlaroc said:
FiF said:
So you're in the pub with some acquaintances or colleagues or maybe even mates, and one of them recounts a story from university days twenty years or more back, do you turn round and ask for documentary evidence?
Maybe you do.
Pub?? Mates??? Maybe you do.
C'mon now.
smn159 said:
WinstonWolf said:
smn159 said:
Russian Troll Bot said:
So given they've confirmed an Officer is being investigated for an "alleged use of language deliberately intended to offend and that had racist undertones." I'm not sure where the made up part comes from?
Do you think that statement supports the overall 'Political Correctness gone mad' tone of the article then?The use of racist language deliberately intended to offend by a senior officer should be investigated, I would have though?
The article is spun to suggest that the guy said something fairly innocent and in being investigated just because of that. The article has no named sources, no direct quotes, no context... A reasonable person might conclude that it is written in that way to play to the prejudices of the readers... unless you have more information?
WinstonWolf said:
What part is 'spun'? The phrase he's being investigated for is "whiter than white". I'm assuming this is the 'deliberately offensive' language you're referring to?
The phrase is a very small part of what he's apparently being investigated for, according to the body of the article, but it has been inflated, or spun if you like, to appear to be the main, or even sole thing the investigation is covering. The irony and hypocrisy of someone in professional standards apparently holding themselves to a standard they now stand accused of majorly failing to achieve seems to have been lost on the Wail and its fanbois, too!
Pothole said:
WinstonWolf said:
What part is 'spun'? The phrase he's being investigated for is "whiter than white". I'm assuming this is the 'deliberately offensive' language you're referring to?
The phrase is a very small part of what he's apparently being investigated for, according to the body of the article, but it has been inflated, or spun if you like, to appear to be the main, or even sole thing the investigation is covering. The irony and hypocrisy of someone in professional standards apparently holding themselves to a standard they now stand accused of majorly failing to achieve seems to have been lost on the Wail and its fanbois, too!
WinstonWolf said:
Should the use of that phrase form *any* part of any taxpayer funded investigation?
Are you asking my opinion? If so, I'd say it depends on the context and who has complained about its use. Neither you nor I set the SOPs and/or professional standards for any of the 43 UK Police forces, so if you're asking me whether I think it should be covered in same, I haven't a clue. As for the pathetic attempt at emotive language, no investigation of this type should be hampered or tempered in any way by it being publicly funded. How else do you suggest such an investigation should be funded?
ETA: 44, really but the BTP is not directly Home Office funded...
Edited by Pothole on Tuesday 18th September 15:01
Digger said:
So when I’m asked how I would like my coffee, how much longer will I be able to reply “black please . . . like my women”?
Hmmm, interesting isn't it?
The same question applied to the bread you like with your fry up: "Thick, white and soft...like my women" only ticks the single bigotry box!
Pothole said:
43 UK Police forces
ETA: 44, really but the BTP is not directly Home Office funded...
45 in the UK.ETA: 44, really but the BTP is not directly Home Office funded...
Edited by Pothole on Tuesday 18th September 15:01
43 in E&W.
You also forgot Mod Plod and CNC.
Just saying ...
And if you want to be really pedantic there are also a small number of Ports Police and other "private" police forces.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff