Farage says he's 'never directly racially abused anybody' after school racism claims

[Stirlingsays]

Brexit, Farage, and the Epstein files.

Had to happen, didn't it?

Happy New Year brexiteers.

😎

Lefty capnip and cope.

So desperate to believe in alternative realities that they will invent them.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Lefty capnip and cope.

So desperate to believe in alternative realities that they will invent them.

And the despicable wretch is smoking a cigarette.
The supporters of his football club should hang down their heads and weep.

 

[beak]

Perhaps, like me, he thinks the whole concept of a super injunction is a ludicrous tool used by the weak minded to protect their image. The old D notice was used to prevent governmental secrets from being known and is understandable; super injunctions not so much.

I would agree with that!

 

[Jimenez]

I know he was in office!

Putting on make up for a party, or for an entertainment event, does not come close to directly racially abusing people.

Didn't one of the Royals Harry I think? Get dragged over the coals for dressing up as a gestapo officer

 

[beak]

Didn't one of the Royals Harry I think? Get dragged over the coals for dressing up as a gestapo officer

well they are German its allowed!

 

[Teddy Eagle]

well they are German its allowed!

But they were born here so they're British.

 

[beak]

But they were born here so they're British.

Saxe- Coburg.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Saxe- Coburg.

And born here, which makes them British doesn't it?

 

[Spindle]

Saxe- Coburg.

That was George V and he was born in Westminster, and his wife was born in Kensington.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Taking the piss is offensive and is therefore as serious, as somebody could take offence to it. As I said, there is proof of what Trudeau did.

If you are offended when someone takes the piss then all that shows is your thin skin.

Farage allegedly did far more than just poke fun. There’s just no comparison, despite your attempt to whitewash it.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Absurd. By this reasoning no one would say anything just in case the subject is considered more offensive in the future when they might become Prime Minister. Those attitudes were, as has been pointed out many times, far more readily expressed back then - even to the extent of being the subject of TV sitcoms.
He has distanced himself by saying it didn't happen.
As stated change is inevitable so accept changes in the past as well.

No he hasn’t.

He hasn’t either denied or condemned it. He has, like others here, tried to downplay its significance.

That fails to distance himself. If anything it provides a link. Which was the point I made.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Lefty capnip and cope.

So desperate to believe in alternative realities that they will invent them.

What alternative realities might they be?

Many of the things the guy refers to are established facts. Conveniently either forgotten or brushed aside by those who also try to pretend things like the Russian involvement in the 2016 election is a hoax.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

No he hasn’t.

He hasn’t either denied or condemned it. He has, like others here, tried to downplay its significance.

That fails to distance himself. If anything it provides a link. Which was the point I made.

OK, if you can honestly claim to have never said anything to which anyone might now take offence. Wanting to be Prime Minster doesn't change anything because nor did he then

 

[beak]

And born here, which makes them British doesn't it?

I'm only teasing you,i thought a funny line would come back,i'm shell shocked at your taking me seriously,i picture you in clowns motley with a funny stick in your hand a bit like Ken Dodd. 😆

 

[Teddy Eagle]

I'm only teasing you,i thought a funny line would come back,i'm shell shocked at your taking me seriously,i picture you in clowns motley with a funny stick in your hand a bit like Ken Dodd. 😆

You can unshock your shell, beak. I don't do emoticons but maybe one would have helped on this occasion. Best keep a supply of salt available and sprinkle liberally over most comments.
Your Ken Dodd reference is perfectly acceptable but someone less Liverpudlian would have been preferable.

 

[Phil’s Barber]

No he hasn’t.

He hasn’t either denied or condemned it. He has, like others here, tried to downplay its significance.

That fails to distance himself. If anything it provides a link. Which was the point I made.

He said he hasn’t ever directly racially abused anyone. That is very much saying it didn’t happen.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

OK, if you can honestly claim to have never said anything to which anyone might now take offence. Wanting to be Prime Minster doesn't change anything because nor did he then

What I might have done as a teenager might have become relevant if I had later sought high office! I haven’t. Farage is! Nobody is concerned about me because I am not going to affect large number of others. Farage already is.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

He said he hasn’t ever directly racially abused anyone. That is very much saying it didn’t happen.

Some witnesses offer other recollections. Claiming not to have “directly” abused is a very weak rebuttal that confirms my point. He has tried to downplay the allegations. Whether directly, or indirectly, he isn’t denying that abuse occurred.

 

[ASCPFC]

What I might have done as a teenager might have become relevant if I had later sought high office! I haven’t. Farage is! Nobody is concerned about me because I am not going to affect large number of others. Farage already is.

You are arguing the moral high ground however. If you ever said, eeny, meeny, miny, moe, it's the same thing. It would make your argument implausible and your viewpoint hypocritical. Did you laugh at Irish jokes? Or Pakistani jokes? Not sure why I'm bothering to ask. Maybe you can tell us a few.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

What I might have done as a teenager might have become relevant if I had later sought high office! I haven’t. Farage is! Nobody is concerned about me because I am not going to affect large number of others. Farage already is.

This is the whole point though. Can anybody claim that everything they might have said as a teenager 50 years ago would bare scrutiny in the current climate? No questionable jokes told or even others' opinions not strenuously enough denied? The point is that not many people at school set their sights on high office (maybe William Hague but he's hardly typical) and even if they had how should they know what will be deemed unacceptable decades later?
What would your reaction be if a future court of public opinion decided any criticism of the US President was totally unacceptable and anyone who'd ever posted any adverse comment should face censure?