News1 min ago
Palace Racism
Ngozi Fulani was asked where she was originally from mmm, whats the problem there
it's not what or was considered a british christian name, i assume the palace get people from around the globe visiting, so why the big hoo haa.
https:/ /www.da ilymail .co.uk/ news/ar ticle-1 1486513 /Prince -Willia m-conde mns-una cceptab le-comm ents-go dmother -Lady-S usan-Hu ssey.ht ml
it's not what or was considered a british christian name, i assume the palace get people from around the globe visiting, so why the big hoo haa.
https:/
Answers
I think that the lady was asking where her family originated from. I think that is a genuine question, maybe not the time nor the place but it is hardly a major issue.
17:51 Wed 30th Nov 2022
lady janine - // Should Ms Headly have attended this event given, as we now know, her antipathy to the Royal Family? //
With the sort of galaxy-sized hindsight that is fuelling the character assasination of Ms Headly following this incident, I see it another way.
She may be indifferent, or even hostile to the establishment, but maybe she felt it appropriate to represent her charity, and attended accordingly, and would probably have enjoyed the day, and not suddenly been catapaulted into the range of those who look for negative reasons why a stranger should not be entitled to be upset.
// (waiting for post to be removed) //
I don't know why you append your posts in this way - posts are removed if they break Site Rules - expressing an opinion does not do that.
With the sort of galaxy-sized hindsight that is fuelling the character assasination of Ms Headly following this incident, I see it another way.
She may be indifferent, or even hostile to the establishment, but maybe she felt it appropriate to represent her charity, and attended accordingly, and would probably have enjoyed the day, and not suddenly been catapaulted into the range of those who look for negative reasons why a stranger should not be entitled to be upset.
// (waiting for post to be removed) //
I don't know why you append your posts in this way - posts are removed if they break Site Rules - expressing an opinion does not do that.
Now, come come, AH. You're talking to seasoned ABers here so let's be honest. Posts that don't break Site Rules are very often removed too - and being a seasoned ABer, LJ is well aware of that.
naomi - // The invitation was possibly - just possibly - a godsend, LJ - and what luck that someone should enquire about her background. //
From your point of view - apparently - otherwise we would never have known that a charity founder is actually an agitator, and may harbour racist tendencies.
But look on the bright side - without her attendance, we would never have known that the widow of the former DG of the BBC is a reactionary old bigot living in the days of the Empire, who clearly thinks black people should know their place and damn well trot out their lineage when demanded to by their 'elders and betters'.
From your point of view - apparently - otherwise we would never have known that a charity founder is actually an agitator, and may harbour racist tendencies.
But look on the bright side - without her attendance, we would never have known that the widow of the former DG of the BBC is a reactionary old bigot living in the days of the Empire, who clearly thinks black people should know their place and damn well trot out their lineage when demanded to by their 'elders and betters'.
naomi - // Now, come come, AH. You're talking to seasoned ABers here so let's be honest. Posts that don't break Site Rules are very often removed too - and being a seasoned ABer, LJ is well aware of that. //
Please don't patronise me.
You don't know, any more than I do, apart from posts I remove obviously, the reasons why posts are removed or by whom.
I am not going down this pointless off-thread path with you again - take it up with the Editor, as you say you do, ad nausum!
Please don't patronise me.
You don't know, any more than I do, apart from posts I remove obviously, the reasons why posts are removed or by whom.
I am not going down this pointless off-thread path with you again - take it up with the Editor, as you say you do, ad nausum!
Ms Marlene Headley turn up at the Palace dressed like queen Aoleon from Coming to America and wonders why she is asked where she "comes from". The National dress has obviously changed if you "come from" Hackney. Or is it a trending affectation for the "women bosses" of charities to dress like they are auditioning for the circus. William should hang his head in shame for throwing the old lady under the wokery bus.
Togo, I think it's been discussed and agreed between the royals and the lady in question, and she walked away voluntarily to save them embarrassment. The royals were obliged to condemn racism - but that doesn't mean they've condemned her. You can bet your boots she's still on their Christmas card list. :o)
Togo - // Ms Marlene Headley turn up at the Palace dressed like queen Aoleon from Coming to America and wonders why she is asked where she "comes from". The National dress has obviously changed if you "come from" Hackney. Or is it a trending affectation for the "women bosses" of charities to dress like they are auditioning for the circus. William should hang his head in shame for throwing the old lady under the wokery bus. //
Again, you appear to have missed the entire point of what was said, and why offence was given, and taken.
Ms Headley was indeed asked where she came from, and she responded that she came from Hackney.
Lady Hussey then said "Where are you really from ..." followed by "Where do your people come from ...".
Now you can take that any way you wish, but the way Ms Headley took it, was the direct inference that Lady Hussey did not believe that she was from Hackney, and was insisting on being given the 'truth' about Ms Headley's birth place, which she had been told, twice, and clearly opted not to believe.
In Ms Headley's place, I too would have been upset and angry, and that is what happened.
As far as 'throwing the old lady under the wokery bus ...' as i have already pointed out several times on this thread, no-one was 'thrown anywhere.
Lady Hussey realising that although she expressed herself badly and without malice, she had unintentionally upset one of Her Majesty's guests, and she opted to apologise unreservedly, and to resign her position.
Spinning it to look like somethng it wasn;t is the reason why this thread has gone on for so long.
One side sees it one way, and is looking for information here there and everywhere to back up its position.
The other side feels that age is no excuse for rudeness, and the offence taken was legitimate, although the subsequent expansion of that offence into emotive terms like 'assault' are not appropriate or helpful.
Again, you appear to have missed the entire point of what was said, and why offence was given, and taken.
Ms Headley was indeed asked where she came from, and she responded that she came from Hackney.
Lady Hussey then said "Where are you really from ..." followed by "Where do your people come from ...".
Now you can take that any way you wish, but the way Ms Headley took it, was the direct inference that Lady Hussey did not believe that she was from Hackney, and was insisting on being given the 'truth' about Ms Headley's birth place, which she had been told, twice, and clearly opted not to believe.
In Ms Headley's place, I too would have been upset and angry, and that is what happened.
As far as 'throwing the old lady under the wokery bus ...' as i have already pointed out several times on this thread, no-one was 'thrown anywhere.
Lady Hussey realising that although she expressed herself badly and without malice, she had unintentionally upset one of Her Majesty's guests, and she opted to apologise unreservedly, and to resign her position.
Spinning it to look like somethng it wasn;t is the reason why this thread has gone on for so long.
One side sees it one way, and is looking for information here there and everywhere to back up its position.
The other side feels that age is no excuse for rudeness, and the offence taken was legitimate, although the subsequent expansion of that offence into emotive terms like 'assault' are not appropriate or helpful.