TV and Radio presenter Danny Baker fired for racist Royal baby tweet.

First topic message reminder :

Good.

"Disgraced Danny Baker has blasted BBC bosses after he was sacked for a royal baby tweet showing a picture of monkey wearing a suit outside a hospital.
The BBC Radio 5 Live host said he had been 'literally thrown under the bus' as he was fired over the phone this morning in what he described as a 'masterclass of pompous faux-gravity.'
The broadcaster, who earlier denied he was racist as he spoke on the doorstep of his £2million home sparked outrage after uploading an image of a couple holding hands with a monkey with the caption: 'Royal baby leaves hospital.'
Baker, 61, deleted the picture as soon as he realised the controversy, and later branded it a 'stupid unthinking gag' when he was hit by a huge backlash as users called it 'racist' because of Meghan's heritage.
He had posted the image just hours after Prince Harry and Meghan, whose mother Doria Ragland is African American, showed off baby Archie to the world at Windsor Castle yesterday."


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7009283/BBC-Radio-5-Live-host-Danny-Baker-tweets-racist-Royal-Baby-monkey-image.html

phildidge wrote:

eddie wrote:But!
I don’t see differences as negative.
And therein lies your answer.

So where is the positive difference from this?

I see many people positivelly and I post countless stories all the time on this

Do you see me ever post this based on skin colour?

So what bearing does skin colour have in the positive, when its used more so in the negative?

That is where your argument falls down. Skin colour should be seen as neutral within humans. It has no bearing on what a human being is.

The moment you argue in the positive or negative fuels this hate of racism

Well there are many black people who like to celebrate their ancestry and their blackness, also Indians, Chinese etc

Is that negative? Not to me.

In any cases I think you’re deliberately missing or misusing my point. So....can’t say anymore than that really.

eddie wrote:Well there are many black people who like to celebrate their ancestry and their blackness, also Indians, Chinese etc

Is that negative? Not to me.

What has skin colour got to do with celebrating their ancestry?

All our ancestors had darker skin

You argued it does not matter where people are born and yet now you are claiming it matters where they are born ancestrally

We are all born to a landmass

Many groups formed into ethnic groups more due to culture, not based on skin colour

That has nothing to do with it. The moment you place importance to skin colour, is the moment, you enable racism itself. As it creates a divide between people. As if skin variations are what matters most to people. I mean have you not learnt a damn thing from centuries of racism? We need to see each other as brothers and sisters and the moment you seperate us through superficial skin colous. Is the moment you fall into the same pattern that saw racism created in the first place. We are all uniquely different and it is what is great about us, but the moment you define us by colouration of skin. When nobody had any ability to alter this. Is the moment you declare that some how collectivelly. We as humans are defined by our skin colour. The very basic tennants of how racism started.

What you fail to grasp, is that for racism to exist, requires people to believe these differences matter

Okay well you totally misused my initial take on this so we will have to agree to differ!

eddie wrote:Okay well you totally misused my initial take on this so we will have to agree to differ!

Yes we will, but I wll leave you with one thought.

Remeber the blue eyed-brown eyed experiment?

The methodology behind this was sound, but it never happened in reality

It was used to expose how racism was wrong and rightly so, but this teacher got one thing wrong

She did this experiment to show that these differences some how mattered.

She got this wrong, as they dont matter. As the reality is people dont define each other by eye colour and to define each other by skin colour is equally wrong. She was on the right track but took the results the wrong way.

You certainly do not define your children by their hair colour or eye colour. So why define them by skin colour?

eddie wrote:It’s not about defining didge, I’m simply saying it’s hard not to notice a skin colour, a tall person, a really fat person etc.
It isn’t about “defining” them. That’s not what I said.

i actually very much agree with you and perhaps i wasn't clear before

noticing is one thing. of course we notice. i grew up with black next door neighbours and my dad and neighbour used to chuckle over the fence to each other after watching ''love thy neighbour''. my neighbours didn't identify themselves as black though, they identified as very much british. and i get what you're saying about just being jokey. a couple of years ago during really hot summer i had been in the garden for days and i tan quickly and easily. i got on the bus and sat next to a black woman there. we both had short sleeves on and i held out my arm next to hers for a quick check. she noticed and glanced at me and i just shrugged and said ''oh dont mind me, love, just a bit of wishful thinking going on, that;s all''. she let out a gale of laughter and we had a merry chat on route.

ever since i was a baby i have had a succession of foster siblings of all different colours all of whom had parents who identified as british rather than skin colour so although it was noticed it was never paid attention to as such

i also used to joke with the oldies at the care home. if i came across bert/freda shuffling along with their frame i used to catch up with them and just say ''ok, you on for a race? just to the end of the corridor,,,ready, steady, GO!''. never failed to make them laugh.

but danny bakers tweet seems solely interpreted on his defining her by a skin colour /racial background and automatically punished, vilified, sacked, an outcast etc

i just think its way too much is all

Green from me.

eddie wrote:Green from me.

thank you eddie

when i was a kid we got twin baby boys from India. I can't remember their names exactly but it was something along the lines of Pabham and Shabham.

At the time my dad spent a lot of his work time as a surveyor on building sites which were mostly Irish dominated and when he came home and found we had a new pair of babies to look after he said 'oh who is this then''. on being informed of their names he said ''you what? oh i can't be doing with that'' and promptly rechristened them as Paddy and Shawn.

they were known as Paddy and Shawn throughout the few years that we looked after them and my dad said that many years later there was a knock at the door and he opened it to find 2 teenage Aisan lads standing there and their mum at the gate who looked at him and said ''Hello there, I've brought Paddy and Shawn back to visit''.

she called her own boys Paddy and Shawn lololol

there was a fab reunion and all but now days if that happened some snotty social worker would insist that he was denying them their own identity and bordering on child abuse etc etc

much has changed


ps i answered your text

DB 's attempts at making excuses got him into a deeper hole, funny as F.   

He never posted such pics when other royal newborns left hospital, so why this one?

He's close mates with Paul Gascoigne whose bigotry has seen him hauled up in front of magistrates. Birds of a feather lol.

gelico wrote:

Syl wrote:

Many people do look at Meghan and see a woman of colour, and she has been trolled in the worst possible way because of that.
Why would a man who works in the media and has a huge following think he could get away with comparing her child to a monkey?

He removed the tweet because he realised what a shit storm it had caused....is it fair he was sacked, imo definately.

and that's the depressing thing, syl.  why?  why do people look at others and see race before anything else?

i'm being honest in the fact that even though i was aware her mum was black, everytime i see megan i forget that (we rarely see her mum)

why is race becoming the defining factor in how we see others?

that sucks

My point was that she has been trolled in the worst way, especially on Twitter, because she is mixed race, yet not only did he post that insulting photo he used that exact  media to post the picture,  he knew what he was doing.

Did he post similar pics when Kate had her babies? 

Race isn't the defining factor when you look at Meghan, nor when I look at her, unfortunately not everyone thinks like that, and posting pics like the one he did is encouraging the racist views imo.

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

Interesting Gels.
So you dont think he was being racist or stupid....or you think he was but people are being too judgmental here?

The question to ask, is whether anyone have batted an eyelid, if this had been when one of William and Kates children had been born?

The photo is not of one mixed ethnically person and someone classed as white.

Its two parents that are classed as white, with a baby monkey in a suit and bowler hat

Looking at that picture on its own, without the recent Royal birth and the Mothers mixed ethnicity. Would anyone class the picture as racist?

The answer is no, is it not?

Though he must have surely realised that people would take her ethnic backround and then place two and 1 together to make 4.

Yes chimps have been used pooorly many times to invoke racism and hence why his actions here were clearly utterly stupid.

If this person has a history of racism, you could understand.

The reality is though, he made a really dumb and stupid choice of photo's.

I have no idea whether he has been previously guilty of making racist remarks, personally I doubt whether anyone reaches their 60's and suddenly becomes a racist..

He isn't stupid, he knew that photo would get him noticed, unfortunately for him he was noticed for all the wrong reasons.

The picture is ugly no matter who it was supposed to be or represent. It matters not one jot if he is racist or or just dumb. There are better ways to communicate what he allegedly was trying to get across.

As a journalist/media personality he should know what this represented. There is absolutely no excuse in this day and age to not know this.

His pathetic attempt at “explaining” just made him look even more of an idiot. He got rightfully sacked and now he’s just groveling to save his career.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

The question to ask, is whether anyone have batted an eyelid, if this had been when one of William and Kates children had been born?

The photo is not of one mixed ethnically person and someone classed as white.

Its two parents that are classed as white, with a baby monkey in a suit and bowler hat

Looking at that picture on its own, without the recent Royal birth and the Mothers mixed ethnicity. Would anyone class the picture as racist?

The answer is no, is it not?

Though he must have surely realised that people would take her ethnic backround and then place two and 1 together to make 4.

Yes chimps have been used pooorly many times to invoke racism and hence why his actions here were clearly utterly stupid.

If this person has a history of racism, you could understand.

The reality is though, he made a really dumb and stupid choice of photo's.

I have no idea whether he has been previously guilty of making racist remarks, personally I doubt whether anyone reaches their 60's and suddenly becomes a racist..

He isn't stupid, he knew that photo would get him noticed, unfortunately for him he was noticed for all the wrong reasons.

Bingo

Cass wrote:The picture is ugly no matter who it was supposed to be or represent. It matters not one jot if he is racist or or just dumb. There are better ways to communicate what he allegedly was trying to get across.

As a journalist/media personality he should know what this represented. There is absolutely no excuse in this day and age to not know this.

His pathetic attempt at “explaining” just made him look even more of an idiot. He got rightfully sacked and now he’s just groveling to save his career.

Of course it matters, when there is no intention of racism meant.

Like I said, would anyone have perceived this, if this was when any of Williams children were born?

The answer is no

It was a stupid thing to do, but there was no raicst intent here and that does matter

People can and do end up being on the end of death threats due to being subject to trial by the media and public

phildidge wrote:

Cass wrote:The picture is ugly no matter who it was supposed to be or represent. It matters not one jot if he is racist or or just dumb. There are better ways to communicate what he allegedly was trying to get across.

As a journalist/media personality he should know what this represented. There is absolutely no excuse in this day and age to not know this.

His pathetic attempt at “explaining” just made him look even more of an idiot. He got rightfully sacked and now he’s just groveling to save his career.

Of course it matters, when there is no intention of racism meant.

Like I said, would anyone have perceived this, if this was when any of Williams children were born?

The answer is no

It was a stupid thing to do, but there was no raicst intent here and that does matter

People can and do end up being on the end of death threats due to being subject to trial by the media and public

I would’ve been just as disgusted. It’s a baby. There is no need for this type of picture to be used.

As to your last point, if they are on social media then that is even more reason to be sensitive and sensible about what you post. I do NOT agree with death threats and if people make them then they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

Cass wrote:

phildidge wrote:


Of course it matters, when there is no intention of racism meant.

Like I said, would anyone have perceived this, if this was when any of Williams children were born?

The answer is no

It was a stupid thing to do, but there was no raicst intent here and that does matter

People can and do end up being on the end of death threats due to being subject to trial by the media and public

I would’ve been just as disgusted. It’s a baby. There is no need for this type of picture to be used.

As to your last point, if they are on social media then that is even more reason to be sensitive and sensible about what you post. I do NOT agree with death threats and if people make them then they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

The point is though me Lady, is that people do over react

Like I say, if this had been to both white parents, this would have not even made the news

Again I think it was stupid and insensitive, but the motivations certainly were not racist

phildidge wrote:

Cass wrote:

I would’ve been just as disgusted. It’s a baby. There is no need for this type of picture to be used.

As to your last point, if they are on social media then that is even more reason to be sensitive and sensible about what you post. I do NOT agree with death threats and if people make them then they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

The point is though me Lady, is that people do over react

Like I say, if this had been to both white parents, this would have not even made the news

Again I think it was stupid and insensitive, but the motivations certainly were not racist

You say that as if it's a fact.
The only person who knows for sure whether his motives were racist or just plain nasty and stupid is Danny Baker, and you are not he.

phildidge wrote:

Cass wrote:

I would’ve been just as disgusted. It’s a baby. There is no need for this type of picture to be used.

As to your last point, if they are on social media then that is even more reason to be sensitive and sensible about what you post. I do NOT agree with death threats and if people make them then they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

The point is though me Lady, is that people do over react

Like I say, if this had been to both white parents, this would have not even made the news

Again I think it was stupid and insensitive, but the motivations certainly were not racist

You say that as if it's a fact.
The only person who knows for sure whether his motives were racist or just plain nasty and stupid is Danny Baker, and you are not he.

Cass wrote:

phildidge wrote:


Of course it matters, when there is no intention of racism meant.

Like I said, would anyone have perceived this, if this was when any of Williams children were born?

The answer is no

It was a stupid thing to do, but there was no raicst intent here and that does matter

People can and do end up being on the end of death threats due to being subject to trial by the media and public

I would’ve been just as disgusted. It’s a baby. There is no need for this type of picture to be used.

As to your last point, if they are on social media then that is even more reason to be sensitive and sensible about what you post. I do NOT agree with death threats and if people make them then they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

Can you imagine how any new parent would feel seeing their beautiful three day old baby being ridiculed all over the internet. Even worse when their baby is of mixed race and a chimp is being likened to their baby.

Danny Baker has been involved in presenting football programmes for years, he knows more than most how football hooligans chant monkey noises at black players, it's been in the news even more recently.
Yet he does this....and then feigns ignorance.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:


The point is though me Lady, is that people do over react

Like I say, if this had been to both white parents, this would have not even made the news

Again I think it was stupid and insensitive, but the motivations certainly were not racist

You say that as if it's a fact.
The only person who knows for sure whether his motives were racist or just plain nasty and stupid is Danny Baker, and you are not he.

Its called determinating the factors

Has there been any racist history with him?

The answer is no

He states it had no racist intent

Its clear as day he made a poor error of judgement, that does not then mean his intent was racist

Unless you can prove otherwise, the fact remains his intent was not racist

Is the original picture when created, was it racist which is more to the point?

The answer is no, as its two white parents in the picture

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

You say that as if it's a fact.
The only person who knows for sure whether his motives were racist or just plain nasty and stupid is Danny Baker, and you are not he.

Its called determinating the factors

Has there been any racist history with him?

The answer is no

He states it had no racist intent

Its clear as day he made a poor error of judgement, that does not then mean his intent was racist

Unless you can prove otherwise, the fact remains his intent was not racist

Is the original picture when created, was it racist which is more to the point?

The answer is no, as its two white parents in the picture

Not sure how you know he has no history of being a racist, are you a friend of his, are you privy to his thought process?
He may not have been publicly racist before, but there is always a first time.

Jeremy Clarkson had also been a public figure for decades before some of his racial slurs were made public.

I did (along with someone else on here) mention before that Baker has not compared any other royal babies (and there have been many) to chimps when the parents have presented them to the world.

How come he thought it was funny to show the first ever part black baby portrayed as a chimp.

Like you said...it's called determinating the factors.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Its called determinating the factors

Has there been any racist history with him?

The answer is no

He states it had no racist intent

Its clear as day he made a poor error of judgement, that does not then mean his intent was racist

Unless you can prove otherwise, the fact remains his intent was not racist

Is the original picture when created, was it racist which is more to the point?

The answer is no, as its two white parents in the picture

Not sure how you know he has no history of being a racist, are you a friend of his, are you privy to his thought process?
He may not have been publicly racist before, but there is always a first time.

Jeremy Clarkson had also been a public figure for decades before some of his racial slurs were made public.

I did (along with someone else on here) mention before that Baker has not compared any other royal babies (and there have been many) to chimps  when the parents have presented them to the world.

How come he thought it was funny to show the first ever part black baby portrayed as a chimp.

Like you said...it's called determinating the factors.

Well celebrity lives are very much recorded and he has been sacked on a number of occasions from the BBC. None of which was for anything remotely racist. He is certainly outspoken. Hence the acts of said people are very well documented

How do you know he has not compared any other Royal babies?

That is you simple second guessing, as have you been through his entire twitter account?

Which is another matter, he is not banned from Twitter, which does not allow racism

That is your interpretation that he showed a picture that on its on, nobody would ever find racist

He saw it differently and then realised his error, when people started to complain

I mean, do you really think he deliberated posted this to be racist and then end up getting sacked?

Do you now start to grasp how its very easy to determine, this was actually a really stupid error of judgement on his part

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

Not sure how you know he has no history of being a racist, are you a friend of his, are you privy to his thought process?
He may not have been publicly racist before, but there is always a first time.

Jeremy Clarkson had also been a public figure for decades before some of his racial slurs were made public.

I did (along with someone else on here) mention before that Baker has not compared any other royal babies (and there have been many) to chimps  when the parents have presented them to the world.

How come he thought it was funny to show the first ever part black baby portrayed as a chimp.

Like you said...it's called determinating the factors.

Well celebrity lives are very much recorded and he has been sacked on a number of occasions from the BBC and LBC. None of which was for anything remotely racist. He is certainly outspoken. Hence the acts of said people are very well documented

How do you know he has not compared any other Royal babies?

That is you simple second guessing, as have you been through his entire twitter account?

Which is another matter, he is not banned from Twitter, which does not allow racism

That is your interpretation that he showed a picture that on its on, nobody would ever find racist

He saw it differently and then realised his error, when people started to complain

I mean, do you really think he deliberated posted this to be racist and then end up getting sacked?

Do you now start to grasp how its very easy to determine, this was actually a really stupid error of judgement on his part

You are clutching at straws now Didge.

I know he has never posted any such picture when a new royal baby has been shown to the world for the simple reason it would have made headlines if he had.....it's a cruel and nasty way to get a dig at a defenceless child, with or without the racist implication.

Do I think he deliberately posted this with the idea he may be sacked because of it?
Nope, I think he was possibly drunk when he posted it without thinking ahead, maybe he also believes he is above the normal rules of moral decency and kindness....who knows, now I am simply guessing... just as you are.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Well celebrity lives are very much recorded and he has been sacked on a number of occasions from the BBC and LBC. None of which was for anything remotely racist. He is certainly outspoken. Hence the acts of said people are very well documented

How do you know he has not compared any other Royal babies?

That is you simple second guessing, as have you been through his entire twitter account?

Which is another matter, he is not banned from Twitter, which does not allow racism

That is your interpretation that he showed a picture that on its on, nobody would ever find racist

He saw it differently and then realised his error, when people started to complain

I mean, do you really think he deliberated posted this to be racist and then end up getting sacked?

Do you now start to grasp how its very easy to determine, this was actually a really stupid error of judgement on his part

You are clutching at straws now Didge.

I know he has never posted any such picture when a new royal baby has been shown to the world for the simple reason it would have made headlines if he had.....it's a cruel and nasty way to get a dig at a defenceless child, with or without the racist  implication.

Do I think he deliberately posted this with the idea he may be sacked because of it?
Nope, I think he was possibly drunk when he posted it without thinking ahead, maybe he also believes he is above the normal rules of moral decency and kindness....who knows, now I am simply guessing... just as you are.

Really, clutching at straws? So you cannot produce evidence and make againa spurious claim. I suggest you go through his twitter account

Where he has been on the radio for decades and there is not single reference to him ever being racist. With thousands of people listening in to his shows all the time?

OMG, it gets more ridiculous by the minute, now you claim he is drunk. How low can you get with such a poor accusation

You just lost all credability in this debate

All I see is the moral Police in action, immediatelly judging and condemning a person as racist and more so off thier views and how they like this Royal couple.

I have stood against racism for years and am very good at understanding when something is overtly racist and when something is clearly an awfful mistake

To claim he now has no decency, shows the really warped level opf hate that people descend to over what was clearly a really stupid mistake

When you descend into hateful, ridiculous mode, I cannot be bothered

So debate over

He has been very apologetic

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/10/danny-baker-royal-baby-chimpanzee-tweet-ex-bbc-presenter-reveals/

Seems Baker has always been a bit of an arse.

Pushing, prodding, threatening, swearing, name calling....what an idiot.  

You cannot make it up. Now this is being investigated by the Police

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/10/police-investigate-danny-baker-royal-baby-tweet/

phildidge wrote:You cannot make it up. Now this is being investigated by the Police

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/10/police-investigate-danny-baker-royal-baby-tweet/

He is now implying he had no idea Meghan was a woman of colour....must be the only person in the modern world that didn't know....and him working in the media for decades too.

Like I said...racist AND liar.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:You cannot make it up. Now this is being investigated by the Police

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/05/10/police-investigate-danny-baker-royal-baby-tweet/

He is now implying he had no idea Meghan was a woman of colour....must be the only person in the modern world that didn't know....and him working in the media for decades too.

Like I said...racist AND liar.

Bullshit. You are just making this up to justify demeaning and claiming hateful views against him

Its simple pathetic.

Just because you claim he is racist, does not mean he is, no matter how many times you want to believe this

Baker, who denied he is a racist, told MailOnline earlier this week that he did not know it was the Duchess of Sussex who had given birth.

'I didn't know which of our royal princesses had given birth. Otherwise you'd got to be thinking I'd been secretly waiting to make this grotesque joke. There's no truth to it.

'I've been doing a thing on the radio for years of famous people dressed as monkeys with fairground music.

'My go-to photo when any posh people have a baby is this absurd chimpanzee in a top hat leaving the hospital.

'Had it not been Meghan - perfectly good joke. I was trying to make a point about class and it's just preposterous.'


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7015969/Danny-Baker-tweeted-royal-baby-two-days-posting-racist-monkey-tweet.html

So he never claimed he did know she was a woman of colour

phildidge wrote:Baker, who denied he is a racist, told MailOnline earlier this week that he did not know it was the Duchess of Sussex who had given birth.

'I didn't know which of our royal princesses had given birth. Otherwise you'd got to be thinking I'd been secretly waiting to make this grotesque joke. There's no truth to it.

'I've been doing a thing on the radio for years of famous people dressed as monkeys with fairground music.

'My go-to photo when any posh people have a baby is this absurd chimpanzee in a top hat leaving the hospital.

'Had it not been Meghan - perfectly good joke. I was trying to make a point about class and it's just preposterous.'


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7015969/Danny-Baker-tweeted-royal-baby-two-days-posting-racist-monkey-tweet.html

So he never claimed he did know she was a woman of colour

He didn't know (even though he works in the media and she has been on every front page for the last months)) which royal wife was about to give birth???
He claims he had to be alerted by followers that the baby was mixed race???? which would imply he was unaware the babys mother was of mixed race???


You keep defending him, he needs all the support he can get.  


He wrote: "Following one of the worst days of my life I just want to formally apologise for the outrage I caused and explain how I got myself into this mess.
"I chose the wrong photo to illustrate a joke. Disastrously so.
"In attempting to lampoon privilege and the news cycle I went to a file of goofy pictures and saw the chimp dressed as a Lord and thought, 'That's the one!' Had I kept searching I might have chosen General Tom Thumb or even a a baby in a crown. But I didn't. God knows I wish had.
"Minutes later I was alerted by followers that this royal baby was of course mixed race and waves of panic and revulsion washed over me,"

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

He is now implying he had no idea Meghan was a woman of colour....must be the only person in the modern world that didn't know....and him working in the media for decades too.

Like I said...racist AND liar.

Bullshit. You are just making this up to justify demeaning and claiming hateful views against him

Its simple pathetic.

Just because you claim he is racist, does not mean he is, no matter how many times you want to believe this

Go and have a lie down till you can award another red …..childish man,

How is that him claiming he did not know she was a woman of clour?

Absurdity at its best by Sly, wrongly reading into something. So you basically lied, as he never once claimed he did not know she was a woman of colour

Frankly I cannot be bothered to have a ratioanal debate on this, when you have already decided and made countless absurd claims against him

I have not defended his tweet. I said it was poor to say the least

What I am rightly countering is your continued hatefest against him

Seriously, you want to feel empowered by demeaning someone by continued bullshit. Knock yourself. Its not a debate, but you ranting

Laters

phildidge wrote:How is that him claiming he did not know she was a woman of clour?

Absurdity at its best by Sly, wrongly reading into something. So you basically lied, as he never once claimed he did not know she was a woman of colour

Frankly I cannot be bothered to have a ratioanal debate on this, when you have already decided and made countless absurd claims against him

I have not defended his tweet. I said it was poor to say the least

What I am rightly countering is your continued hatefest against him

Seriously, you want to feel empowered by demeaning someone by continued bullshit. Knock yourself. Its not a debate, but you ranting

Laters

No, it's about two people having different opinions on someone who has been in the news the last few days.
You get upset because my view is different to yours....hence the red stripe, the name calling  and the accusing me of lying all the time.

You said yourself earlier in the thread, when I asked you how you KNEW what someone was thinking..."Its called determinating the factors", Well we have both done that, come to different conclusions on the evidence presented, and that should be that.

Move on without the insults and the tantrums, it's called debate.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:How is that him claiming he did not know she was a woman of clour?

Absurdity at its best by Sly, wrongly reading into something. So you basically lied, as he never once claimed he did not know she was a woman of colour

Frankly I cannot be bothered to have a ratioanal debate on this, when you have already decided and made countless absurd claims against him

I have not defended his tweet. I said it was poor to say the least

What I am rightly countering is your continued hatefest against him

Seriously, you want to feel empowered by demeaning someone by continued bullshit. Knock yourself. Its not a debate, but you ranting

Laters

No, it's about two people having different opinions on someone who has been in the news the last few days.
You get upset because my view is different to yours....hence the red stripes and the accusing others of lying all the time.

You said yourself earlier in the thread, when I asked you how you KNEW what someone was thinking..."Its called determinating the factors", Well we have both done that, come to different conclusions on the evidence presented, and that should be that.

Move on without the insults and the tantrums, it's called debate.

Not one insult from me to you

But you certainly have been

Syl wrote:
Go and have a lie down till you can award another red …..childish man,

Most of your views were made up

He was not drunk, you claimed he was, based on no evidence

You claimed he said he did not know she was a woman of colour

Again made up by you

This is what happens when someone already holds a bias as you do. You start to crate things in your head to justify your views against this person

The man has apologised, hence move on

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:
No, it's about two people having different opinions on someone who has been in the news the last few days.
You get upset because my view is different to yours....hence the red stripes and the accusing others of lying all the time.

You said yourself earlier in the thread, when I asked you how you KNEW what someone was thinking..."Its called determinating the factors", Well we have both done that, come to different conclusions on the evidence presented, and that should be that.

Move on without the insults and the tantrums, it's called debate.

Not one insult from me to you

A quick recap in this thread alone..you use words like HATEFUL, RIDICULOUS, BULLSHIT, LIAR, my point proven.

Like I say when further discussion is pointless...we will agree to disagree.

Syl wrote:

phildidge wrote:

Not one insult from me to you

A quick recap in this thread alone..you use words like HATEFUL, RIDICULOUS, BULLSHIT, LIAR, my point proven.

Like I say when further discussion is pointless...we will agree to disagree.

Clutching at straws, which you also said to me and dont take that as an insult, just as the above are not insults

Seriously get a grip syl

phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:
A quick recap in this thread alone..you use words like HATEFUL, RIDICULOUS, BULLSHIT, LIAR, my point proven.

Like I say when further discussion is pointless...we will agree to disagree.

Clutching at straws, which you also said to me and dont take that as an insult, just as the above are not insults

Seriously get a grip syl

You are twisting the conversation round to suit yourself now.

You stated you had not thrown one insult out in the thread.....I simply showed that you have.

Nothing to do with getting a grip, I was just refuting your claim.

How fragile you must be to think they are insults

wow

Laters, as i cant be bothered if you make ridiculous claims like that.

Anyway back to Baker.
His carefully worded apology was given yesterday.....his attempt at damage limitation, which probably wont help his future career in broadcasting.

"Following one of the worst days of my life I just want to formally apologise for the outrage I caused and explain how I got myself into this mess.
I chose the wrong photo to illustrate a joke. Disastrously so.
In attempting to lampoon privilege and the news cycle I went to a file of goofy pictures and saw the chimp dressed as a Lord and thought, 'That's the one!' Had I kept searching I might have chosen General Tom Thumb or even a a baby in a crown. But I didn't. God knows I wish had.


Minutes later I was alerted by followers that this royal baby was of course mixed race and waves of panic and revulsion washed over me... What had I done?


I needed no lessons on the centuries slurs equating simians and people of colour. Racism at it's basest.But it was a genuine, naive and catastrophic mistake.
 
There is of course little media/twitter traction in such a straight-forward explanation. The picture in context as presented was obviously shamefully racist. It was never intended so - seriously who on earth would 'go there'?


Anyway I am now paying the price for this crass and regrettable blunder and rightly so. Probably even this final word from me will extend the mania. ('Dog whistle' anyone?) I would like to thank friends on here for their kinder words and once again - I am so, so sorry."



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48226247