British Group Exhibits Extreme Ignorance

[Sibling Chatty]

The National Children's Bureau, which receives £12 million a year, mainly from Government funded organisations, has issued guidance to play leaders and nursery teachers advising them to be alert for racist incidents among youngsters in their care.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/education/2261307/Toddlers-who-dislike-spicy-food-racist%2C-say-report.html

The article goes on to explain all sorts of stupid stuff, obviously written by someone who has never been around a three year old. They say YUK to ANY food they have never seen, and to most foods they HAVE seen...

The 366-page guide for staff in charge of pre-school children, called Young Children and Racial Justice, warns: "Racist incidents among children in early years settings tend to be around name-calling, casual thoughtless comments and peer group relationships."

It advises nursery teachers to be on the alert for childish abuse such as: "blackie", "Pakis", "those people" or "they smell".

The guide goes on to warn that children might also "react negatively to a culinary tradition other than their own by saying 'yuk'".

And exactly HOW does a child use a racial slur unless the child has heard it from adults?

Brits, that 12 million pounds a year, mostly from your taxes, that they get to be dumb with...at least the US gub1mint wastes our money on loud booming stuff and invading our privacy!! 

[beagle]

Are you winding me up or really turning Tory

By the way, see this South Park episode for the U.S. equivalent.

[goat starer]

fantastic torygraph journalism...

"It advises nursery teachers to be on the alert for childish abuse such as: "blackie", "Pakis", "those people" or "they smell"."

so far so good - clearly racist terms that anyone in the care of children should stop them using for a whole raft of reasons.

The guide goes on to warn that children might also "react negatively to a culinary tradition other than their own by saying 'yuk'".

totally different statement and no evidence that the report tries to claim this is racist - stick one next to the other and they look like the same thing but the torygraph article does not say that the reports describes this as racist behaviour... just that it says this may happen - which as chatty has pointed out is quite likely.

but why stop with that piece of journalistic daily mail deviousness when you can add....

Staff are told: "No racist incident should be ignored. When there is a clear racist incident, it is necessary to be specific in condemning the action."

couched as though this might relate to the food point but in fact a totally seperate statement.

put three separate sentences from parts of a report together and you can make anything look more stupid than it is. lets try simplifying this....

Children should be made to not use racist language
Children may react negatively to foriegn food
racist incidents by children should be tackled

all three statements are palpably true - they only become stupid when some f***wit eton/oxford dipsh*t journalist who cant enjoy carnal pleasures because of years of inbreeding has nothing better to do with their life than cut and paste reports to sensationalise race issues. Low crappy journalism... same with bendy bananas etc etc etc

typical bloody tories. devious, untrustworthy, selfish, arrogant... i would have them all shot!

(obviously except beagle - and apparently chatty now too!  )

[Sibling Chatty]

Dude, when I find a dumbass article, I quote a dumbass article.

I'm not qualified to be a Tory. I don't have the accent...

[beagle]

The point young Goat is that yet again the government is spending serious amounts of money on political correctness grandstanding by pointing out the bleeding obvious to people who already know more about children's behaviour and motivations than they ever will.
There are probably thousands of nursery school carers with better things to do, who presumably now have to study 366 pages of guidelines  or risk being censured should they be caught deviating from the approved approach one iota during an inspection.

I'm with Chatty, kids don't discriminate on race any more than they discriminate on height, weight or football ability until someone puts the idea in their head that this form of attack will be particularly effective.

I'm not qualified to be a Tory. I don't have the accent...

Neither do I. More Sarf Lundun than Eton  .

[goat starer]

Dude, when I find a dumbass article, I quote a dumbass article.

I'm not qualified to be a Tory. I don't have the accent...

hey I'm not shooting the messenger... only the capitalist swine 

apparently we can all be tories now. Accents are an optional accessory. It is having a lack of fundamental beliefs and decency that qualifies people. The generally accepted unit of measurement for toriness is now known as the 'Sound Bite' which is subdivided into 'inconsistencies' (ten inconsistencies make a soundbite. For example on car CO2 taxation David Cemeron rates one soundbite. Making him a slightly pinko tory on this issue.

But you would make a terrible tory on both counts.

and even Beagle brings shame on his party by having convictions (although certain convictions are positively applauded by tories - mainly those for corruption and perjury relating to bizarre sexual practices)

[beagle]

Ever heard of David Davis Goat? How many Labour MPs have risked calling a by-election in their constituency on the principle that even terrorist suspects must not be locked up without charge?

What are Labour principles? Lying about holding an EU referendum in order to get re-elected? Locking up people with a suntan until proven innocent?
Going for the quick family-friendly soundbite then realising you've overtaxed the poorest in the land to enable it? Sounds like expediency, panic, and cock-up to me, rather than principle.

[goat starer]

what do i care about Labour? they are just tory lite these days.

but on your specific point... ITS NOT THE SAME AS THE CONSTITUTION

as for David Davies - his record on principles around human rights is hardly inspiring. he has consistently voted against equal opps legislation for years. The sudden caring sharing epiphany he seems to have undergone is shameless angling for the Tory leadership.

on this issue he is right.... but the standpoint he is expressing is not tory. How do you think Thatcher would have voted? she would have had all brown people strung up as terrorists given half a chance!

[Griffin NoName]

I am deeply concerned about the increasing use of the word "morality" by Cameron.

[goat starer]

indeed...

i am also concerned by the current tory strategy for winning the next election. stuff details like 'policy'. just repeat the word 'dither' in every interview and bobs your uncle.

[Griffin NoName]

hhhhm -   just like the "positive"* and "negative"* symptoms of schizophrenia?

*apologies to siblings who may assume these two terms carry their usual meaning as in the field of mathematics: in psychiatry, they are used in slighty different manner

[beagle]

but on your specific point... ITS NOT THE SAME AS THE CONSTITUTION

Giscard (who should know), most of the rest of the EU leaders, and the parliamentary committee that scrutinised it, say otherise.

on this issue he is right.... but the standpoint he is expressing is not tory. How do you think Thatcher would have voted? she would have had all brown people strung up as terrorists given half a chance!

Of course it's Tory.  And there's no need to speculate on how Thatcher "would" have voted. You forget Baroness Thatcher sits in the Lords. She will get to vote on 42 days, and she voted no to to 60 day detention on 25 Jan 2006 and against ID cards in various votes. Seeing as she has never voted against the Tory line it's unlikely she will assist GB in his quest to arbitrarily detain people of any colour.  By the way, she and the Asian business community were and probably still are big admirers of each other, so the implied racist slur doesn't really work.

i am also concerned by the current tory strategy for winning the next election. stuff details like 'policy'. just repeat the word 'dither' in every interview and bobs your uncle.

Actually I think the core strategy is just to let Labour keep digging; maybe pointing out the more outrageous lies.

On policy you can expect Labour to re-discover the proposed Tory automatically adjusting fuel tax witin weeks.

I am deeply concerned about the increasing use of the word "morality" by Cameron.

None too surprising IMHO given the headlines coming out of London these last few weeks.

[Griffin NoName]

I am deeply concerned about the increasing use of the word "morality" by Cameron.

None too surprising IMHO given the headlines coming out of London these last few weeks.
[/quote]

Ah! London !  That cesspool.  Get thee to the countryside !

[beagle]

Take your choice:

Dr. Watson.

"Under such circumstances I naturally gravitated to London, that great cesspool into which all the loungers and idlers of the Empire are irresistibly drained. "

Mr. Holmes:

"It is my belief, Watson, founded upon my experience, that the lowest and vilest alleys in London do not present a more dreadful record of sin than does the smiling and beautiful countryside."


Of couse suburbia gives one the best of both. Sin loungers perhaps. 

[Griffin NoName]

Suburbia is quite another kettle of fish