HearFromYourMP

Comments

• Posted by Rob Turner, 16:00, Tue 13 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  it probably was a stupid thing to say, but i'd like to hear comment from the young soldier Harry was referring to...his view may put this one in some sort of context/perspective

• Posted by Tony Armstrong, 16:03, Tue 13 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  Absolutely agree with you Diane. The lazy attitude that suggests racism can be tolerated because the person using racist language is "only having a bit of fun" is deeply wrong.

  Whilst I agree with your stance in this update, I note that the subject of your last 2 updates have focused on this story and on the Damien Green affair. Before that, there was no update for several months. In a time of economic crisis, I would have expected you to update your constituents more fully on immediate issues facing them as well as on issues such as these. By not focusing on matters related to the economy, I'm afraid you give every impression of being completely out of touch with the realities of life in Hackney.

• Posted by Rory MacTague, 16:10, Tue 13 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  Dear Diane,

  I think people should leave off condemning Lt. Wales as these statements were quite obviously something said in jest between a group of people who had bonded together over some fairly arduous training, to become this nations best.

  The idea that a private individual cannot engage in idle conversation with his friends for fear of being filmed, because he is "special", perpetrates the kind of elitism which I Lt. Wales worked against by choosing to serve overseas incognito.

  That it was leaked, is a betrayal of trust between these friends AND HIS SECTION and is disappointing and I feel reflects far worse on the Army, than the utterance of just two epithets in jest by a young man to a friend.

  I take objection to the rather leading rhetorical style of your questions; the idea that one cannot relax and joke and share in our differences is a stifling mode of thought and should be fought off with humour and wit on any occasions that the enemy, the closed mind, shows itself.

  Ubique!

• Posted by Silvia Murray, 16:16, Tue 13 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  I whole-heartedly agree Diane. I have been shocked to see how the media appears to show more voices of support for the prince, than they do for victims of racist bullying.

  I've even heard ludicrous defenses like 'it was a private video - not meant for public consumption'. Racism is never okay, whether intentional, accidental, public or 'privately between consenting adults'. Racist language suggests racist attitudes, which will most likely lead to racist behaviour- which is certainly not a 'private matter' - it concerns everyone.

  I found it obscene to see such a high profile royal of the United Kingdom- the epitome of the 'privileged white male'- saying something so patronising and demeaning as 'our little Paki friend'.

  I've been hoping for more people to voice an opinion on this matter similar to yours and feel reassured to finally hear it.

• Posted by Robert Pendar-Hughes, 16:35, Tue 13 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  This is an era when we should be encouraging all peoples to respect each other, so the remarks on Prince Harry's video aren't very helpful. To be ultra lenient, he may have been using these epithets in an 'affectionate' way, since the two men he highlighted had undergone officer training with him. Perhaps the firm bond of comradeship established during that period allows for such schoolboy name calling between young officers. I'm afraid that is no excuse - let's be clear, those terms are deeply offensive and seek to denigrate all Pakistani people. Silly bugger....he should have known better.

• Posted by Sahar, 16:44, Tue 13 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  I think HRH Prince Harry was naive and is young and put his foot in it big time, like grandad! That doesn't make it right especially coming from him (Royal Household). It sets a bad example and I dont think ethnic minorities will be rushing to join the Armed forces just yet. The Army needs to keep showing it won't tolerate behaviour like this.

  PS To Rob Turner - I read that the soldier's uncle has said he (uncle) would like Harry to apologise.

• Posted by Georgiana Vear, 17:03, Tue 13 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  I entirely agree with Ms Abbott's views. ANY derogatory racial names are in no way acceptable under any circumstances. I was appalled and offended and also very embarrassed that Prince Harry made these comments. I also don't understand the argument that being in the armed forces somehow excempts a person from being accountable for racists remarks.

• Posted by John Callon, 17:11, Tue 13 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  This story has masked the real questions that should be asked. Who obtained a copy of this video and from whom? How long have they held it? Why was it released this week? How much were they paid for it?

  This is an example of someone being GREEDY. The whole world is now suffering from greedy people and it is time greedy people were challenged.

  On balance, greed seems to be more damaging than racism; I'm not advocating either.

• Posted by Kate Creedy, 21:51, Tue 13 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  Offensive terms, whether they are directed at ethnic minorities, white , black, chinese, indian, malay, men, women or children etc. etc. are fundamentally rude. The issue is not the colour, gender,age of the people involved but the intent to belittle. Poitical correctness and the inability to discuss the function of prejudice in enabling a dominant group to allocate respect or actual financial or social resources is the problem. The words are symbolic of this act of marginalisation and exclusion. I am, as a woman offended by the way most cultures marginalise women as 51% of the earth's population, I believe..... However, we have all, to some degree, experienced discrimination..no one group, because of colour, class, gender etc has a right to special pleading on this issue. Understanding the function of prejudice is more important than ascribing it to one particular group at a particular moment in history.

• Posted by Rob Turner, 08:23, Wed 14 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  John Callon raises interesting points.plus i'm not interested in what the UNCLE has to say. I wouldn't want my uncle/parents speaking for me. Everyone is getting offended on this soldiers behalf without ever asking him what he thinks

• Posted by Silvia Murray, 15:26, Wed 14 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  I think the most important part of your statement Diane, is this: <blockquote>It is vital that ethnic minorities feel comfortable reporting incidences of racism, and are not made to feel like they are making a fuss or over-reacting. I am not sure how easy it would be to complain about being called a “Paki” if people around you were claiming it was only a bit of fun. </blockquote>

  Unfortunately it seems that a minimisation of racist language is not just part of army culture, but also the opinions of your constituents - judging by the calls to hear the opinion of the target of the comments, before being able to cast a judgement... How likely do they think it will be that he does come forward with everyone saying it was all a bit of fun in a particular context, between friends? (- i.e.- he'd be making a fuss to complain.)

  And besides - this is an issue about the 3rd in line to the throne, and how we feel about him using racist language- surely something that affects the nation, rather than normalised racism of the army many people seem to be so quick to defend.

• Posted by Jacqui Deprez, 19:44, Wed 14 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  Agree. If racism is endemic at the top then it filters down. If its deemed to be ok and permissible and only a joke by our Royal Family (at his friend's expense and his friend isn't going to object now is he - really?) then ordinary people will be accused of making a fuss over nothing. Racism at every level should be treated severely but at this level that ain't going to happen. Hopefully yes he wll have grown up a bit since, and realise that it can be deeply offensive. but you can just hear all the yobos saying "well if its ok for Harry its ok for us" can't you?

• Posted by Sharon Irvine, 21:28, Wed 14 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  I think it's very hard because while in some instances - like this particular one - racist terms are, by themselves, very derogatory, in other instances certain groups in society are trying to "claim back" words used against them (the instance I'm thinking about in particular is the LGBT groups reclaiming the word "queer")

  Because of this it is very hard to put a quantifiable statement on the use of such words, but I think that, in context, it is quite easy to work out if such a word was used in a derogatory manner or not, which in this case, I think it was.

• Posted by Jo Homan, 22:16, Wed 14 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  I agree with Diane. I had no opinion of Harry before, but now I think he's a bit of a tool. No one should be allowed to get away with using that language.

• Posted by Simon Pennington, 09:52, Mon 19 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  No the army is not a special case

• Posted by Mhairi-Gael Morrison, 14:25, Tue 20 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  In this instance, Harry has proved himself to be a silly little boy with little grasp of how offensive this word is. He be put through whatever appropriate military disciplinary measures, and hopefully know better in future. He has apologised and I hope he is sincerely ashamed of himself.

  What is far more detrimental, however, are the people who are trying to condone Harry's behaviour. This is not the message we want to send out to young people - that is is ok to call somebody by an offensive name as long as it's 'a joke' - after all, Prince Harry did it and people said it was alright.

  I am shocked and disappointed by the amount of people who leapt to Harry's aid even after he himself acknowledged that he had acted inappropriately. I think this country has made a lot of progress in race relations over the last 30 years and would hate to imagine that people might think the ignorant comments of a member of the Royal family to reflect the views of this nation.

• Posted by Steve lane, 13:41, Wed 21 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  How on earth can we ever expect to see a black prime minister when our leaders have such ignorant views?

  In America they have a bill of rights and have fought for their freedom and rights.

  Here we have done very little - It's hard enough for a white person to exercise their human rights (without paying lots of money) let alone anyone from the ethnic minorities.

  Our constitution is made by a few elite, mainly white people who have very little concern (despite their rhetoric) for anyone except themselves.

  30 years ago my friend was murdered - his crime was that he was a "Paki" and the ignorant white thugs that killed him (he was 18) were "Paki bashing". Harrys remarks remind me of that time and shows that we have not moved on at all.

  Steve Lane

• Posted by Murray Rogers, 10:30, Thu 22 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  How is this the first time I've received an email from my MP in several months? Whilst I agree that this does not shine a great light on Harry, there are rather more important things we should be consulted on. War? Recession? How about discussing them?

  As for this case, I think context is relevant. I doubt it excuses Harry in this case. But to equate uses of words irrespective of their context is naive.

• Posted by Mhairi-Gael Morrison, 00:38, Fri 23 January 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #

  To Steve Lane - I just wanted to say that I think the amount of comments, and on the whole the nature of them, shows that we have moved on a lot from the days when those sorts of terms were widely used. What happened to your friend was unforgivable, as were Harry's comments, but I think that the similarity ends there.

  To Murray Walker, I agree that this whole affair is starting to smack of tabloid journalism and I would like to see the government looking to the people to deal with the grassroots causes of this, and many other, issues that affect us.

Commenting on this message is now disabled.