Perhaps our collective familiarity with such medical terms says a lot about us 
Lawrence
- Thread starter Micilin
- Start date
Sponsored Links
B
Big Tone
For those who don't know, I work in the NHS in RehabPerhaps our collective familiarity with such medical terms says a lot about us
So I talk to REAL people about PC bull. My dear late cousin had much to say about this too; born with CP. (A screw up at birth by medics with her oxygen).
Are you a patient or a client? I'll stop there because I could write a book on this topic!!! There's no consistency between the doctors, Clinicians, OT's, SLT's.....
The current terminology for someone in a wheelchair is 'a wheelchair user'. Did we all know that here campers? Sounds like American terminology/speak, where they attribute the 'thing' literally to the condition. Sidewalk etc. etc. No prob, I'm cool with that.
I dont believe in something which is a put-down. (Handicapped = cap in hand). I have been on so many PC courses they are coming out my ears! But who is actually offended by the more anodyne terms?
In my, considerable, experience it's not the 'afflicted' who are bothered about these petty and pedantic semantics. No, they are far more concerned with REAL respect.
There but for the grace of God go I. And I am more aware and certainly reminded of what could become of me than most. So call me a patient or client or Tony. I know one thing; how I am actually treated and recognised will mean more to me than arguing about being Anglo - American or some other bullsshite term a PC nob wants to make a non-racist feel like a racist...
Indeed. So was "cretin".
From my old faithful 1930's home doctor book, if defines "Cretinism" as a "peculiar form of idiocy"
And 'mongolian idiots'. They used to call a spade a spade in those days without, of course, intending any derision.
Sponsored Links
L
longdogs
No surprise there BT
Just read the article you link to Big Tone. It does say in it that Greenwich Council will only consider the request if it comes from the Army.. Easy solution then,,, let the British Army put in a formal request for a memorial to Lee Rigby.. (let's see if that's refused)
The Lee Rigby discussion is worthy of another thread. We had a monument in Luton in recent years to a police officer and I remember there used to be one in Willesden in London to another police officer. I'm not sure if the police initiated offical moves, but in Luton it was popular demand that got the ball rolling.
I don't think there is precedent for such a crime ,where a soldier is murdered in a hateful crime but not strictly speaking in the line of duty. What has the Army done in the past? For instance there is a memorial where the Guardsmen were killed in Hyde park. Is there any reason why the Army would not want this to happen?
The council should make up their mind , IMO, based on the merits of the individual and the feelings of the local people. I can understand two limiting factors
1) they should be mindful of the Army and work with them rather than against them. The Army are quite good at procedure and red tape , as are councils so between them this could be a reason but no excuse for lack of clarity.
2) Memorials should not be rushed as they need to differentiate between short term reaction and long term rememberance. I don't think this is necessarily the case here, but it may be in the minds of the authorities.
But to tie this in with the Lawrence case just sullies the memory of Lee Rigby
I don't think there is precedent for such a crime ,where a soldier is murdered in a hateful crime but not strictly speaking in the line of duty. What has the Army done in the past? For instance there is a memorial where the Guardsmen were killed in Hyde park. Is there any reason why the Army would not want this to happen?
The council should make up their mind , IMO, based on the merits of the individual and the feelings of the local people. I can understand two limiting factors
1) they should be mindful of the Army and work with them rather than against them. The Army are quite good at procedure and red tape , as are councils so between them this could be a reason but no excuse for lack of clarity.
2) Memorials should not be rushed as they need to differentiate between short term reaction and long term rememberance. I don't think this is necessarily the case here, but it may be in the minds of the authorities.
But to tie this in with the Lawrence case just sullies the memory of Lee Rigby
B
Big Tone
Thanks Micilin, and sorry. It's certainly wasn't my intention to be disrespectful ether to Lee or Lawrence and I sincerely hope I have not been so.
I do not agree that it sullies his memory though! I believe only the person in question can do that with something they have personally done. (Case in point, Saville). I think it just points to an elephant in the room and doesn't help dismiss the perception that someone or 'some Body' is taking the p1ss. Are the armed forces unwilling so as just to keep the peace? (Rhetorical). As you say, separate thread.
But it doesn't help with race relations IMO and instead gives ammo to the likes of the BNP etc. Likely as not, they would say if it's good for one it should be good for another. Equality and respect works both ways, or at least it should...
Not meant to you, BT ,as you are pointing to a link made by others.
But it shows how if the police had done their work properly, we would not be discussing Lawrence today . Then the tragic case of Rigby could be considered on its own merits, not in some macabre competition of whose murder is most deserving of a memorial.
Remember that this would never be a an issue at all, never mind a race issue, if the police had treated the family fairly.
And this is why those who want to 'move on' without acknowledging injustice always store up resentment and make future cases difficult to deal with.
When the Lawrences had their lives ruined back them, they had no idea of the impact it would have on future cases. To involve them in events that happened years later to someone else is also distasteful to me.
Two tragedies, beyond compare for each family involved, now being used in the Lee Rigby case for a quite transparent agenda. The Rigby family grief being hijacked. No other way of looking at it when you see some of the comments on it. Why can't his memory be honoured for his sake alone? Disrespectful in the extreme for me.
Some of the people involved need to have a look at themselves. Leaves a bad taste with me.
That is not directed at the posters in this thread, but the links I have followed up.
The dignity of the Rigby family and their wish not to have bigots using his death for other agenda are quite apparent here.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22725999
As are the wishes of his comrades wrt certain groups
'Brig Ian Liles, regimental secretary to the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, said: "It is wrong and disgraceful that the death of one of our own should be exploited in this manner."'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22725999
As are the wishes of his comrades wrt certain groups
'Brig Ian Liles, regimental secretary to the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, said: "It is wrong and disgraceful that the death of one of our own should be exploited in this manner."'
Sponsored Links
