Tory donor openly states Dianne Abbot should be shot..

[VestibuleVirgin]

Frank Hestor reportedly said: “It’s like trying not to be racist but you see Diane Abbott on the TV, and you’re just like… you just want to hate all black women because she’s there.
“And I don’t hate all black women at all, but I think she should be shot.
“(The executive) and Diane Abbott need to be shot.”
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/frank-hester-tory-donor-diane-abbott-comments-black-women-labour-b1144631.html

Abominable, disgusting. Aibu to be incecsed by this?
Money allows all sorts of behaviours apparently, particularly if you give a lot of it to a political party.

It's an investigation by The Guardian which may have taken a while. He wasn't a huge donor to Johnson so has more recently become a figure of public interest.

@TwigletsAndRadishes revenge is a dish best served cold ?

I haven’t once accused you of derailing the thread and I’m not pretending to misunderstand your point - I genuinely don’t know what you’re trying to say.

I think you’re trying to say that ‘what’s good for the goose is good for the gander’ - that DA deserves to be the subject of these remarks because she has said questionable things herself.

Which is abhorrent.

Her constituency seem to like her

whatsitcalledwhen
I find it staggering that you don't outright condemn the comments

My very first post on this thread was;
Hester's remarks were clearly unacceptable

And I don't for a second believe that if the above happened with a labour donor, you wouldn't be calling labour morally bankrupt if they kept the money and KS refused to call the donor racist.

I have already posted that I think Sunak should call out the comments - I see he has now. I'm still not sure about returning £10 million in an election year - perhaps Hester should make a substantial donation to charity instead.

It's like trying not to be racist but you see Priti Patel on the TV

As for Priti Patel - there are several regulars on this thread who thought it was acceptable to refer to Priti Patel as a variation of a 'diseased prolapse' - another who started a thread about Suella Braverman being 'unwell' and 'half mad' (even more so because she is a Buddhist). Several posters also joined in the thread about Suella Braverman 'secretly enjoying' being called 'Cruella' ...
#BeKindVoteLabour.

Probably @Clavinova Probably

It is the most ethnically diverse cabinet history, funded by a racist.

Diverse. And worse?

"I'm still not sure about returning £10 million in an election year"

This implies that you'd return the cash if it wasn't an election year.

@Clavinova

I'm still not sure about returning £10 million in an election year

So you believe that in principle, morally, returning the money is the right thing to do, you just wouldn't do it in an election year?

So it's money over morals then? At least you're on brand I suppose.

I would probably return the latest donation at least.

whatsitcalledwhen
So it's money over morals then? At least you're on brand I suppose

Like Gordon Brown you mean and his non-dom friends.

And it's a bit like calling water wet.

Are you like this in real life? Unable to discuss any Tory behaviour without referencing Labour? It's really odd!

And FWIW plenty of people are capable of thinking people in both parties have been cowards / racists / misogynists / bullies etc.

Not all of us do this strange thing you do where you pick a 'side' and flatly refuse to discuss anything your 'side' has done wrong without whataboutery.

It's tedious and to be honest, very immature.

It's amazing Diane Abbot is still an MP to be honest as she is very incompetent, but yeah that was a horrid comment. No need for that tone.

Tone? What a huge minimisation.

Saying you want to shoot someone and that they make you 'want to hate all black women' is a bit more than 'tone' isn't it?

So the tone is the issue rather than the racism and the sexism?

Ach, ignore it.

Did I miss reports of Non doms discussing shooting women?

I note that you'd return some of the money if it weren't for the election.

It's the right thing to do but not if it means the Conservatives have less money to spend on campaigning.

whatsitcalledwhen
And FWIW plenty of people are capable of thinking people in both parties have been cowards / racists / misogynists / bullies etc.

Is that why posters were defending John McDonnell's comments on this thread?

@Clavinova

You seem incapable of making any comments about the behaviour of members of the Tory Party without mentioning completely different members of the Labour Party.

Obsessive, really. Very odd.

It must be exhausting having to resort to whataboutery in every single post rather than having the courage of your convictions and feeling confident in your opinions.

No one defended those comments, clav. It was just pointed out that they weren't his comments.

But you know that.

Once again Sunak has been glacial in his response to racism in his party. He really is a dead duck.

whatsitcalledwhen
Not all of us do this strange thing you do where you pick a 'side' and flatly refuse to discuss anything your 'side' has done wrong without whataboutery.
It's tedious and to be honest, very immature.

In that case most politicians are tedious and very immature as most of them can't answer a straight question without mentioning the opposing party.

Yes, but none of those things were said because of their skin colour or because they are women; they were said because they support fucking horrific policies for political gain.

And no-one has extended the insults to all Asian women because of Cruella and Shitty.

Do you see the difference?

Probably not.

With a few notable exceptions. Didn’t corbyn make a big deal out of not always point scoring?

who’d have thought it, Clav’s a Corbynite!

IClaudine
No one defended those comments, clav. It was just pointed out that they weren't his comments

They came out of John McDonnell's mouth and the "stain on humanity" comment was his own creation.