"It's racism" said some cliché loving frau to British actor, Laurence Fox re Meghan's treatment in the UK...

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

In the meantime his twitter feed has gone nuts....left and right.

How big is his cock? Pics?

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

As much as I appreciate his willingness to take an unpopular opinion and stand up for it, not unlike Scarlett Johansson, Laurence Fox is legitimately stupid, even for a typically self-important actor and not a very good one at that. But yes, r4, his cock is very respectable and he showed it off to the 14-year-old Keira Knightley in The Hole.

Whether You agree with that woman or not, let's make one thing clear. L. Fox is an asshole and truly overprivileged case of nepotism.

He's the son of '60s actor, James Fox

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

"Our cottage and HRH titles."

So fine when it's a British person like Fergie, or Prince Andrew paying off millions to silence his accusers but a little American half black girl wants to come in and redo some interior decorating and my goodness where does she get off! It's ok for a rapist who buys sex from underage girls to keep his HRH titles absolutely! He's British and deserves it! Oh how he deserves it.

Remember guys, in England is far, far more offensive to be Meghan Markle a woman who enjoys attention, shopping and interior decorating than it is to be Prince Andrew, a man who enjoys paying for sex with trafficked underage women.

He goes by the nickname "Lozza". That alone makes me hate him.

Meghan Markle proved herself to be an unlikeable person who made no effort to hide her unlikeable qualities, probably because she lacks the insight to know she's got them. So she got what she gave during her brief failed career in the UK.

This chatter about Meghan Markle and race trivializes actual race issues. But we live in a trivial time.

What does Lozza mean?

It's fake-working class "luvvie" for Laurence.

I don't know how much of the Markle stuff is or is not based on racism but "white privileged male" is definitely an apt description of Fox.

R10, the public has known for years that Andrew is shady (see the scathing portrayal of him on The Windsors). As soon as he tried to prove otherwise in that disastrous interview, he was disgraced and removed from royal duties. Nobody's fine with him. At the same time, people can not like MM.

Wow, another racist OP linking to the racist Daily Heil. Just another day on DL.....

They're both right, and they're both wrong. It's called nuance and unfortunately no one is able to explore it safely anymore.

She's right in that the oh-so-subtle flavor of British racism colors what gets emphasized in the media reporting and from those individulals most vocally critical of MM's stint in the BRF so far. From Piers's personal-snub vendetta to Chrissie von Reibnitz's Sambo-esque accessorizing to even the utterance of the word 'uppity' (when Americans with any experience in the South all know what word always comes next), you can't deny race is a variable in the story.

But she's wrong in that it's the sole or even main variable. Some of it is just distaste an American arriviste entitlement. And then she compounds her poor argument by playing the 'white' and 'privelege' cancel cards.

He's right in calling out her hypocrisy and attempted deplatforming. Later on he's even more amusing when the humorless and irritating anti-semitism apologist Shami Charkabati tried to bait him on sexism because he dared say something positive about Keir Starmer and not a women candiate because their genitals are all that matters.

But he's super idiotic in pretending there's no racism at all, that the UK is the 'most tolerant and lovely country in europe' (I'll grant they're better than Italy.) And 'I'm not the puppet, you're the puppet' only qualifies as respectable argument among Russian stooge neofascists on either side of the pond.

Dunce meets moron. Nobody wins.

Interesting opinions expressed in this post.

[quote]to call me a white privileged male is to be racist - you're being racist

Straight guys are a scourge.

The fact that he is using MLK Jr. to justify what he said, and included the phrase "the tide is turning" -- indicating that people are starting to wake up to the horrible racism rich white guys like him endure every day -- is pretty telling.

[quote]He's right in calling out her hypocrisy and attempted deplatforming

You don't know what deplatforming is, apparently. No one tried to deplatform Fox. Ironic that you're scolding everyone here for not understanding nuance when you don't even understand the words you're using.

Interview #1 from a few months ago:

Oh look, he's one of our anti-trans trolls.

Interview #2 from a few months ago:

He's a full-on alt-right dipshit. He's also ugly as hell. His dad didn't age well but at least was very handsome for several years early in his career.

You know it's possible that it's not always racism with everyone who hates her. Maybe it's more misogyny and anti-Americanism.

Had it been someone like Paris Hilton or Kim K he married, I still can't feel the level of hatred they have for Meghan. They get vicious! Melania Trump may be a close second. Perhaps Meghan should get a copy of her jacket.

[quote] Wow, another racist OP linking to the racist Daily Heil. Just another day on DL.....

But you accuse everyone of being racist. And you think doing anything whatsoever is racist.

The term has become meaningless. The way you use "racist" is simply to note, "This person disagrees with me."

There's certainly plenty of racism directed at her from DL.

Again, the term is now meaningless.

That's not the point that's being made, R28.

(it's like talking to children sometimes)

R27/R29/R30: Oh my dear bitch, that is the point of this thread. It's about Markle, not your stupid quest to attack me and claim racism means nothing anymore because you don't want to talk about it. Honestly, its like talking to disingenuous morons on here. The Daily Mail is racist, that's not up for debate. And an obvious driver of a lot of the hate towards Markle is her skin color, to deny it is folly. The fact that you think my one comment on this thread means I call everything racist is a real indictment of your intelligence. I would reflect on this were I you....

Unfortunately the police and government really cocked it up over the grooming gang scandals by taking their sweet time to even acknowledge the issue existing, and still doing fuck all to address the problem on both a cultural and institutional level. The Manchester story breaking this week is just another in a long line of stories that will keep on coming. Fox was right about that.

[quote] The Daily Mail is racist, that's not up for debate.

I’m sure that would come as a surprise to the “people of color” who work there or read it regularly.

This is why screaming “Racist!” has lost all effect. It’s designed to shut down the conversation and cast stones at the other person, to identify them as a sinner.

Any one who does not agree with the Left is racist........Yawn!

Non-gay non-Jewish whites deserve racism.

[quote]It's called nuance and unfortunately no one is able to explore it safely anymore.

Preach!

R34, that's because the Right is racist and the Left isn't.

[quote]No one tried to deplatform Fox.

Yes they did. Step one: your words don't count because of who you are. Step two: you're not even allowed to speak because of who you are. You must be one of those woke types who doesn't believe in the the first amendment.

[quote]The term has become meaningless. The way you use "racist" is simply to note, "This person disagrees with me."

This is the current whiny alt-right talking point, but it's ridiculous. What people like you tend to do is single out someone who writes some quickie response on social media and then claim that their vague reply is what "all you liberals do" and is proof that "it doesn't mean anything, because you don't explain it."

Then you conveniently ignore the people who give you specifics and details about why you (or a situation) is racist. It's an old troll trick and it works -- or gives the appearance of working on places like Datalounge which are full of sockpuppets and trolls. But racism is real and no amount of claiming it isn't or that the word is meaningless will change that.

[quote]Yes they did. Step one: your words don't count because of who you are. Step two: you're not even allowed to speak because of who you are. You must be one of those woke types who doesn't believe in the the first amendment.

Some random lady in an audience has no power to deplatform anyone, and Fox is obviously not deplatformed, considering he's been going on for days now on Twitter, spouting alt-right troll talking points.

And get back to me when you finally figure out why the First Amendment doesn't apply in this situation, or to British actor Laurence Fox.

[quote]spouting alt-right troll talking points.

can you post an example?

R40: Well said. And as we can, these retarded right wing trolls cannot STAND being called out and held accountable for their bullshit. Cry harder, trolls. Cry. Harder.

Ok well anyway, here's the link to his cock.

[quote] What people like you tend to do

And that's exactly when I decided to put you on "Ignore."

The Hole (2001)

LOL

In fairness to Laurence Fox, his entire career is built on his surpassing ability to be an annoying prick. It is what he does best.

"Deplatform" is being used two different ways in this discussion.

The person saying that the audience member is trying to "deplatform" Fox is using it in a micro level -- she discounts -- i.e., deplatforms -- his observations out of hand because of the color of his skin, his wealth and his holding of the wrong beliefs.

The person refuting that argument is using "deplatform" in the macro level -- Fox is not being denied his right to speak, and on television, no less!

Both are correct.

[quote] [bold]What people like you tend to do[/bold] is single out someone who writes some quickie response on social media and [bold]then claim that their vague reply is what "all you liberals do"[/bold]

Pot, meet kettle.

[quote]But he's super idiotic in pretending there's no racism at all, that the UK is the 'most tolerant and lovely country in europe'

Indeed, Fox sounded like a silly stroppy well-meaning student. There's tolerance and loveliness as well as toxic racism. The latter's been repulsively energised, barely disguised, by both Brexit and Meghan. Denying it is like denying cancer.

I remember being told that not voting for Jennifer Hudson on "American idol" was "pure racism."

And that white women wearing big hoop earrings was "racist."

[quote]The latter's been repulsively energised, barely disguised, by both Brexit and Meghan.

You're a twit.

I don't know how you people have managed to make racism boring, but you have. Both sides.

He's still hawt! I'm sure he's had the homosex!

Even very intelligent people I know on my facebook are discussing this whole Meghan and Harry "fiasco". You would think that is the ONLY problem in the world given how people are talking about it.

R54 - I think it's precisely because everyone is tired out from the real shit (that most of us can't control, anyway) that it's fun to talk about the Harry and Meghan fiasco.

It's the equivalent of a gossip vacation before you are forced to return home to reality and turn on the telly to hear about Rebecca Long-Bailey trying to keep Corbynism alive in Labour, or, alternatively, on the other side of the Pond, turning on the endless coverage of the impeachment shit.

Either way, it makes many want to scream.

At least with the Harkles, you mostly laugh. It's about as upsetting as Downton Abbey.

FWIW: I rather liked Lozza in "Inspector Lewis" - he was hot in an odd way with his duck walk.

And, in one episode of, I think, Endeavour, he did a nearly full frontal and he looked very . . . doable. Or was it another one of our endless mystery series?

Not "Endeavour" - the nudie scene was in the series "Jericho" - a sports' team shower, gents, episode called "The Killing of Johnny Swan"

(Guess for what the unfortunate Mr Swan got done in for?)

Fox is alleged to be 6'3"

Some of those Daily Mail comments are completely racist. Saying she would have a wide nose and kinky hair, insinuating she's ghetto. Hoping the baby isn't a monkey.

That's racist. I've seen enough What Would You Do? with John Quinones to know they could replicate the same experiment and have people not freak out.

It does seem to stem from a know your place region. The vibe feels like 'this foreign, non-English woman does not get to have more fun than me, at my paying expense!'

[quote]It does seem to stem from a know your place region. The vibe feels like 'this foreign, non-English woman does not get to have more fun than me, at my paying expense!'

They were even worse with Fergie. Trust me.

His full frontal shower scene in The Hole was glorious. I don’t give af about anything else.

[quote]The vibe feels like 'this foreign, non-English woman does not get to have more fun than me, at my paying expense!'

The 'Daily Mail' readership was once summed up as those who live in hourly resentment at everyone who has a better life. The quote above expresses this well.

Oh please Markle herself is racist. Outside of her mother who is considered 'presentable' You sure as hell didn't see any of her black relatives at her wedding. And she is on good terms with them! I'm sure they are low class very dark skinned people that even A list blacks don't won't to deal with except for photo ops. The embarrassment of having them rubbing up against all those British aristos in the Queen's Chapel! Appalling.

I guess as a black female i must be racist for not liking her. Such bullshit.

Somewhere Billie Piper is saying to random passersby-"I'm not married to him anymore, you know!"

The 'cliché loving frau' you refer to, OP, an university lecturer specialising in race, racism, and anti-racism.

I'd take her opinion of what constitutes racism over the ramblings of some fucking actor.

Anyone who takes the subjective opinions of an academic seriously is foolish. I don't discount formal research by academics... that's demonstrable outcomes... but an academic prattling on about society is just Twitter with better manners.

[quote]The 'cliché loving frau' you refer to, OP, an university lecturer specialising in race, racism, and anti-racism.

And Donald Trump is the President Of The United States Of America.

You're almost as irritating as she is.

PLUS the actor doesn't ramble.

But please, go on being impressed with her "credentials" if it makes you feel safe in the world.

BTW, R64, Jordan Peterson is an academic, university professor and researcher.

Bet you don't take his opinion.

Bet he DOES, R67.

“The vibe feels like 'this foreign, non-English woman does not get to have more fun than me, at my paying expense!'”

What’s wrong with that? Why SHOULD the UK taxpayer shell out millions a year for Meghan and Harry’s housing, travel, and security costs if these two aren’t even going to be working royals anymore?

The Windsors are billionaires. Shouldn’t they be paying it themselves?

I was amused when they asked Fox who he thought would make the next best Labour leader and, having responded with a man's name, the woman next to him asked dryly: None of the women? So Fox comes back with: Let me rewind, any of the women.

R62 - You have lots of company on Lipstick Alley. They have an "Unpopular Opinions about Meghan Markle" that is on Part 2 already and up to 2,500 posts. I check in there once in awhile but have to start at the back because their threads expand so quickly.

They mostly consider her quite privileged in many ways and resent her playing the race card while clearly leaning white (they often refer to her as "that heifer" or sometimes "that heffa", which I assume refers to her light skin, as heifers look white when born). One stated, "I don't consider her black, she doesn't hang with us" - which for the most part, she doesn't.

It's a continuing amazement to me how "siloed" all these groups are from each other - there is no such thing as an exchange of views any longer. I read Celebitchy's royal columns, scanning for any semblance of sanity and objectivity, although it is increasingly difficult given their pathological defence of anything Meghan does, and their equally pathological hatred of Kate, and the magical powers they attribute to William and to Carole Middleton. I also check in to Lipstick Alley, and I also check into Harrymarkle Wordpress, in my opinion the best out there for laying out the case against Meghan.

I won't check in any longer to Skippy or Torontopaper1 any longer, as they are clearly living in alternate universes. I'm still convinced Skippy is one of the Sophie Cumberbatch Is The Devil cabal who got bored waiting for her beloved "Dorkybatch" to divorce Sophie and go back to being Sherlock.

Trevor Phillips, the former "equality czar" in Britain, who has written some very interesting papers on race relations in Britain, has what I consider to be a more balanced, and broader set of views up on the DM on the Meghan-Harry debacle. He also doesn't think it's racism, at least not in the obvious sense. And he is also opposed, generally, to Meghan and Harry having their cake and eating it, too.

For those interested in long reads and nuance, this piece from the New Yorker stuck with me and seems more and more relevant.

R64, you might be particularly interested in the parts detailling the theories and methods of the white workplace-diversity trainer with a PhD in multicultural education.

If you don’t like Markle, you’re racist!!

And if you don’t like Melania than you are anti immigrant and hate sex workers.

I'm not a fan of Laurence Fox, but I'm quite shocked by how little attention the mainstream media is giving to the Manchester grooming scandal. It should be a much bigger story than it is.

R71... in your travels do you get a sense of where our invaders come from? Their content is fairly predictable and their time of day not far behind. On other boards do they ever boast about their trolling here?

[quote] I won't check in any longer to Skippy or Torontopaper1 any longer, as they are clearly living in alternate universes.

I must confess that I sometimes check in with Torontopaper1. It's like reading coded messages which may or may not mean anything.

I have learned over the long time following of this saga (as far back as the Dangling Tendrils threads) to take all stories and posts with much suspicion.

The trolls screaming "racist" haven't anything to say, I notice, about the fact that the Labour Council and the police in the sex grooming scandals looked the other way as long as possible because the perps were all "Asian" (i.e., Muslims, mostly of Pakistani background).

Who was more the victim of racism: Meghan Markle and her privileged rich life as a royal fighting a bit of negative PR that she herself helped to generate?

Or the thousands of young Anglo girls thrown to the wolves over 15 years in Rotherham - raped, hooked on drugs, trafficked, etc. - by "ethnic" minority men because the officials were too frightened to let it out that they were going after predominantly Muslim grooming gangs?

Which, by the way, were uncovered across England, not just in Rotherham.

It was the progressive left that covered it up - not the Klan.

R51: YOU LEFT WINGERS ONLY INSULT, YOU DON'T DEBETE SMURT LIKE WE RIGHT WINGERS, LEFT RACIST!!!!!

Look at those Thai ping pong balls FLY across the room......

Sometimes people hate MM because of her race and sometimes not. Some more or less than others. Some not at all.

It's as simple as that.

[quote]The 'cliché loving frau' you refer to, OP, an university lecturer specialising in race, racism, and anti-racism.

Ah, so she got her degree in advanced basket weaving --oops, I mean social work. Such a rigorous program (not!) --LOL.

Reportedly, Fox gained 55,000 new Twitter followers after the brouhaha.

And tons of freaky hate mail and had his life threatened. He barely said ANYTHING.

Including stupid Lilly Allen

And had his Actors Equity membership threatened.

For saying NOTHING.

You've seen him attacked on here by the usual morons. Accusing him of all sorts of bizarre shit.

People don't even listen - they REACT.

They just busted another sex trafficking gang in Manchester. It had been going on for years. Why are Brits so willy-nilly because these sick pigs happen to be Muslims? In America it would be taken care of in five minutes.

I just hate Meghan because the media won't shut the fuck up about her. I find it hilarious that some people are obsessed with the royals and seem to place their hopes and dream on them like they do with entertainers.

What r78 and r86 said. The grooming gang scandal, which occurred in about 20 towns and cities where hundreds of perpetrators acted in concerted gangs to rape thousands of underage girls, went intentionally ignored by police for decades because of the race of the rapists.

It is one of the most foul, shameful, fucking disgusting things I've ever heard about. And it involves genuine racism, both on the part of the rapists, who chose their victims by age and race, and by the police, who turned a blind eye for decades because of the rapists' own race.

All this bullshit pretending the the UK was racist towards Meghan Markle when they in fact welcomed her with open arms? Meanwhile the grooming rape scandal goes unmentioned, where genuine - and now, admitted - racism prevented police from acting in case after case of little girls being raped and mutilated (one case the gang raped a 12 year old with a metal scouring brush, another age 14 had her tongue nailed to a table to warn her against 'telling', and there were several instances where the girls were branded with hot metal)? To say nothing of the girls who died.

Yes, real racism exists in Britain, but none of it has anything to do with, or has ever even affected, Meghan fucking Markle.

r88's post should be broadcast everywhere.

The Queen who I'm beginning to think is a very evil person ignored her own son's involvement with sex trafficking of underage girls. And I have no doubt she knows everything. She seems to have a very high tolerance for abused children whether in her own family or in others. She tolerated her own sister's incredibly trashy behavior which was jawdropping in its ugliness.

Diane's hatred of the royal family seems less pathological now than realistic. They drove her over the edge to the point where she was unhinged. Her son doesn't have a chance.

Ooooooooh K.

Klan thread

Bosom buddies.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The Queen is so happy this is taking attention away from Andrew who is the tip of the ice berg.

From 2012 concerning Savile:

She(the Queen) has refused to comment on the subject despite the fact that the scandal is a moral issue of public interest and that she is directly involved in the matter: the BBC is run by 12 trustees appointed by the Queen in person while she granted Savile knighthood in 1990. Indeed, Savile was knighted when his abuse was well underway and the Queen should have distanced herself and the royal family from the pedophile immediately after allegations of his pervert activities to ward off unwanted speculation. However, there has been no comment by the Queen herself, her office or the royal family as if she knew of the Savile’s scandalous behaviour and decided to decorate him regardless. As for the BBC, it runs under a Royal Charter, the present one having come into force in 2007 and running until the end of 2016. The corporation is also ruled and supervised by the BBC Trust, which is a board of 21 trustees directly appointed by the Queen to set “the strategic objectives of the BBC” and chooses the broadcaster’s director general who heads its Executive Board in charge of its services and output. The magnitude of the Savile scandal and the unfolding drama including comments by Tom Watson MP who openly suggested in parliament that there may be a pedophile ring going right to the British Prime Minister’s office at No 10 Downing Street raise more questions. Is the Queen aware of the true scale of the scandal that is currently unknown to much of the public and even investigators and wants to keep herself out of any inquiries?

Laurence Fox interviewed by Brendon O'Neill, recorded the day after his Question Time appearance.

You do realize R95 that Savile received his award in 1990 and the abuse investigation began in 2012 and you do further realize that Savile's knighthood would have been the government's advice, which the Queen would - must - follow and you might further realize that for the Queen to make any comment would have seen her stray into politics and appear to criticize the government, which would have shattered her duty to impartiality and been outside her constitutional duties and made no sense given the 22 years between the knighthood and the criminal investigation and you probably also no doubt know that Tom Watson has been entirely discredited with regard to this conspiracy theory.

Other than that, thanks for your contributions. A source might have helped. Now go back to Celebitchy. It's over. Your horse lost.

The whole family is happy Meghan's taking the blame for everything.

It is because she's American, a woman and subconsciously, they don't even know it, but half black.

Thanks, R96....I liked listening to Brendon as well. He's so clear and eloquent. I'm going to check him out further.

I don't look to actors for political insight, ergo I don't hate Fox for his stupid statements. That's what I expect from actors.

I just hate him for being effortlessly thin. Tall and effortlessly thin. Damn him.

He wasn't stupid at all. You speak in “soundbites”. You probably don’t even know what he said. You're just style and no content.

on talk radio today or yesterday, I'm not sure.

Sounds like typical right-wing "Liberals are the real racists" bullshit.

And he sings 🎶

^ ^ sorry wrong link

And he sings 🎶

☞

I wonder if all this hysteria - on both sides - may finally break the foolish fever of woke... seems me Fox has accidentally triggered, if you will, a climate where the majority can finally say: give your head a shake.

I think we are all more sensitive to the feelings and experience of minorities, and that's good and valuable, but there is a brigade out there constantly seeking to be affronted and, frankly, they get in the way of the progress they claim to seek. But they don't seem to want progress, they seem they'd rather just be angry.

I think it gives them a sort of self-sanctification and the illusion of being intelligent. They won't give that up easily.

There are plenty of these people here on DL and on this very thread. Maybe they'll respond.

But of course they won't as they haven't one original thought in their heads. They speak in insults and soundbites.

R108. She looks tremendous like most woke liberal women shouting into the air like a lunatic.

Thanks for that interview R96. Both interviewer and subject are really thoughtful, reflective and smart. Such a refreshing antidote to the SJW madness.

Exactly, R108! Couldn't have said it better myself.

Well... she has a point.

As the author says by 1990 Savile's predilections and perversions were already widely known by many people. And I'm sure nobody holds a gun to the Queen's head to knight perverts which she surely knew he was. I was in the music distribution business starting in the late 80s and James Levine's behavior was widely known and a source as they say of great merriment. But he was protected by very powerful rich people in including The New York Times. All the Met general managers knew about his appalling behavior and protected him including Gelb for many years who fired him with great laughable self-righteousness when it became publicly not tenable to do so. The Queen's behavior is I'll put it generously inscrutable. She certainly is The Teflon Queen.

[quote]As the author says by 1990 Savile's predilections and perversions were already widely known by many people. And I'm sure nobody holds a gun to the Queen's head to knight perverts which she surely knew he was.

Savile had enough big Establishment connections to stifle inquiries lower down the scale. He was friendly with and admired by Charles and Diana; spent time with Thatcher at The Prime Minister's country retreat; spent time with Cardinals in London's clubland.

If the honours committee had thought to make inquiries with certain tabloid editors, and they'd told all they knew, Savile's Knighthood would have been seen as extremely unwise. A non-starter. Courtiers would have known that after Savile's death the floodgates would open, and so it proved. There's no way they would have risked that great embarrassment by association for The Queen. It was a naive or stupid oversight, pure and simple. The Establishment is more than capable of huge clunking mistakes. Savile had the luck of the devil.

Why are people talking about Saville here?

SJW is a right-wing term used to denigrate anyone who thinks fairness is a good thing.

That’s not what SJW’s believe, r116.

Duh R115. Because the Queen is in her glory knowing that this takes the heat off her pedophile son and the pedophile rings which circle back to the royal family. That's why she just went to church with him. I can just imagine God listening to Andrew praying. 'What the fuck is up with this guy?'

And her courtiers and she herself must be beyond stupid to have allowed Andrew(she is not only his mother but his boss) to go back to cavorting with Epstein after his conviction. This stupidity goes back decades. Meghan has been a godsend to the crown. A helluva lot more attractive and interesting than disgusting sweaty Andrew. A charismatic spiderwoman with her tentacles around a dimwit depressed prince is certainly a lot more entertaining.

Duh, here.

I guess you make a good point...maybe more due to the fact you’re such a good writer.

Let's not forget the Queen awarded Andrew the Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order long after the Daily Mail to its credit had published detailed allegations of his consorting with criminal elements. The lickspittle press like to portray her as someone whose instincts are flawless. However, as this indicates, she's merely a stonking rich grumpy old biddy who is happy to give gongs to her family however contemptible their behaviour. Most anyone's old nan is more worthy of respect: at least they don't award criminal behaviour!

Interview with James Delingpole:

Interview with James Delingpole:

"The terrifying parable of Laurence Fox’s Question Time appearance" by Douglas Murray

[quote]Nothing that Fox said on Question Time was at all controversial. He suggested that the Labour party leader might be selected on merit and he suggested that Britain is not a racist country. Both these sentiments are held by the majority of the public. Yet so dominant have the minority-opinion pushers become that many people are persuaded that it would not just be career-damaging but socially fatal to say anything to the contrary. Even when that thing is the truth.

"The Grooming Gang cover-up is Britain's real racism scandal"

Basically making the same point as the post above (r88) but 3 days later.

Maybe the Telegraph reads the DL, or maybe it's just an obvious, easily observable truth that all the race baiters screaming over imaginary racist slights of Meghan Markle are remarkably silent over the mass rape of thousands of British girls, targeted largely because of their skin colour (as several perpetrators have in fact since testified) because the perpetrators all have another skin colour. To say nothing of the police knowingly refusing to investigate these thousands of crimes, also because of the perpetrators' ethnicity. Now that is real, tangible racism, which has led to not just mass rape, but also torture, mutilation and the occasional murder going unpunished because of ethnicity.

Unless the self-appointed 'race experts' screeching about supposed mistreatment of Markle equally address the shockingly huge issue issue of the racism in the 'grooming gangs' scandal, they do not deserve to be taken remotely seriously on the subject of racism in Britain.

On breakfast TV this morning.

He's getting death threats from the Tolerant Left

If those grooming gangs had happened in the US, the perps would've been shot dead by the fathers of some of those girls.

Laurence. Dear, Laurence. Please go read the thread about Peggy Siegal.

Ooops, too late for that, really. Good luck with your career!

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Yes, 129, but apparently in separate squads. In the movie he appears with a group of the British soldiers.

They had Laurence on a breakfast tv show in that clip and just attacked him for saying what he said in what was just a youtube chat with a friend. It was a sort of assassination and then they sent him home.

Poor Laurence. I've grown to like him very much.

[bold]oh, dear 2hrs ago on twitter:-[/bold]

Fellow humans who are #Sikhs

I am as moved by the sacrifices your relatives made as I am by the loss of all those who die in war, whatever creed or colour.

Please accept my apology for being clumsy in the way I have expressed myself over this matter in recent days.

r130, the DM article indicates that though the soldiers were segregated at the beginning of the war, some units were soon integrated to accommodate the manpower shortage.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Someone upthread made the claim that the left can't be racist; only the right. Well, I'm left-of-center, politically, and the far-left (with mainly white women leading the charge) is most certainly racist! They constantly see minorities (and women) as perpetual victims who can't make it based on merit and who always need assistance from a white savior. They pay lip service to being colorblind, but they're often the first to point out race. For instance, I've noticed that there's a hierarchy of oppression on the far left; the more oppressed you're deemed to be, the more entitled you are. For instance, I'm a swarthy, gay Latino, so in their eyes I have it worse than white men, white women, or heterosexual men of any color. However, since I'm 'cisgender' and a naturalized US citizen, I have it better than trans of any color or illegal immigrants. Therefore, they are more entitled than I and I shouldn't complain about all the attention the Democrats give to them. It's madness! No wonder they're constantly pissed and angry at the world! I would be too if I constantly saw myself and peers as helpless victims.

[quote] the far-left (with mainly white women leading the charge) is most certainly racist!

Absolute bullshit.

No, r136, there is research that shows the more extreme leftist "SJW" positions are more likely to be adopted by women than by men.

It's just the same right-wing "Liberals are the real racists" nonsense.

Lord help us, what a face on this Trumpanzee

Hee tweets all day long now. His politics have overtaken everything.

Yes, it was / racism based on petty jealousy that their beloved Prince Harry was taken away from them by this foreign dark-skinned hussy. British fantards of the Royals were furious and the media exploited issue to sell magazines, get clicks, higher ratings, etc.

Demand and supply. Whatever it takes to make money off of these fantard losers. Just look at these crazy boyband fans who feel incredibly threatened when their favorite (ex) boyband member gets a girlfriend and declare it's open season for her.