Dianne Abbot

Sponsored Links
Either way, I’ve no doubt Diane Abbot has given Keir Starmer a handy opportunity to get rid of her.

Abbot spends her time tweeting comments that contradict Labours positi…
 
Not true in law
**** the law.

As an example: the Kurdish people have been fighting for their own homeland since the British arbitrarily carved up the region of Iraq/Syria and displaced them with a piece of finely worded legalese. Armenians are denied justice thanks to lawyers arguing one way or another.
Writing 'Jews are a race' on a piece of paper doesn't necessarily make it true. You may as well rely on Andy111's 'gut feelings', in regard to these complex issues. Even they do not subscribe to this sophistry.
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
For me race should be physical, inherited etc and Ethnic Group is broader and more about culture. Either way Abbott can add this to her long list of gaffs. She does seem a muddled individual. Starmer sees her as an election liability and has pounced.
 
Abbott can add this to her long list of gaffs. She does seem a muddled individual.

And yet she keeps winning her seat...................

Starmer sees her as an election liability and has pounced.

Yes, if nothing changes she'll likely keep her seat, but will do the party's election chances great harm overall.
 
If she is without the labour mandate, they will stand another candidate and even with a split vote, its likely Labour will still win that seat.
 
In the United Kingdom the landmark legal case Mandla v Dowell-Lee placed a legal definition on ethnic groups with religious ties, which, in turn, has paved the way for the definition of an ethnoreligious[60] group. Both Jews[13][14][15] and Sikhs[61][62][63] were determined to be considered ethnoreligious groups under the Anti-Discrimination (Amendment) Act 1994 (see above.
By the way, Donald Trumps daughter converted to Judiasm when she married Jared Kushner.
So therefore Donald Trumps daughter is now biologically Jewish.
 
Ahh I see your point.. Yes they were later categorised as that, but the above case, did mean they were protected as a race. The amendment expended the definition further and the Equalities act went even further still. Its all still Race from a legal perspective.

Under the Equality Act 2010, race is a protected characteristic, and you must not therefore be discriminated against because of your race.

Race can mean your colour, or your nationality (including your citizenship). It can also mean your ethnic or national origins, which may not be the same as your current nationality. For example, you may have Chinese national origins and be living in Britain with a British passport.

Race also covers ethnic and racial groups. This means a group of people who all share the same protected characteristic of ethnicity or race. A racial group can be made up of two or more distinct racial groups, for example black Britons, British Asians, British Sikhs, British Jews, Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers.

You may be discriminated against because of one or more aspects of your race, for example people born in Britain to Jewish parents could be discriminated against because they are British citizens, and/or because of their Jewish heritage – either is unlawful.

Abbotts opinion try to undermine this, which is why she is currently on the naughty step (again).
 
Either way, I’ve no doubt Diane Abbot has given Keir Starmer a handy opportunity to get rid of her.

Abbot spends her time tweeting comments that contradict Labours positi…
It has long been a source of bafflement to normal people, as to how this dozy cow Diane Abbot has managed to get away with saying the most stupid and racist things about white people for so long.
One can only conclude that this is because in the main she targets white/ British / Brexit types only.
However this time she went too far by breaking the unwritten rule of don't invoke the 'Holocaust, jewish persecution, Hitler and WW2' experience to further your argument without permission.
Ken Livingstone made the same mistake, he too made a career out of accusing others of racism, he even went out of his way to be seen associating with IRA terrorists, he got away with all this until he made the Cardinal error making political comments about Hitler and the Jews.
The only good thing to come iut of this debacle is that we might finally see the last of Diane Abbot.
 
Ahh I see your point.. Yes they were later categorised as that, but the above case, did mean they were protected as a race. The amendment expended the definition further and the Equalities act went even further still. Its all still Race from a legal perspective.

Under the Equality Act 2010, race is a protected characteristic, and you must not therefore be discriminated against because of your race.

Race can mean your colour, or your nationality (including your citizenship). It can also mean your ethnic or national origins, which may not be the same as your current nationality. For example, you may have Chinese national origins and be living in Britain with a British passport.

Race also covers ethnic and racial groups. This means a group of people who all share the same protected characteristic of ethnicity or race. A racial group can be made up of two or more distinct racial groups, for example black Britons, British Asians, British Sikhs, British Jews, Romany Gypsies and Irish Travellers.

You may be discriminated against because of one or more aspects of your race, for example people born in Britain to Jewish parents could be discriminated against because they are British citizens, and/or because of their Jewish heritage – either is unlawful.

Abbotts opinion try to undermine this, which is why she is currently on the naughty step (again).
I think the correct term for these groups should be ethno/ religious.
These laws classifying certain groups as races, are for political and community relations reasons.
 
She's nearly 70, it's about time she retired. She's been an MP for a long time, so she will enjoy a fat pension. There will be plenty of leftie after dinner speaking slots for her.
 
I think the correct term for these groups should be ethno/ religious.
As we have seen from the arguments on this thread, it can be the interpretation of the term that can be problematic.

As with many of these terms, 'Race' is a human construct, as with language, the term is fluid, and has had different meanings over time.


These laws classifying certain groups as races, are for political and community relations reasons.
As described by @motorbiking above, the laws are there to define, or at least limit the definition of these terms.
Without the law, we may end up with the free-for-all that has been demonstrated here, where our inate feeling for what 'Race' means is at odds with others...
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
Back
Top