ChatterBank22 mins ago
Palace Racism
Ngozi Fulani was asked where she was originally from mmm, whats the problem there
it's not what or was considered a british christian name, i assume the palace get people from around the globe visiting, so why the big hoo haa.
https:/
it's not what or was considered a british christian name, i assume the palace get people from around the globe visiting, so why the big hoo haa.
https:/
Answers
I think that the lady was asking where her family originated from. I think that is a genuine question, maybe not the time nor the place but it is hardly a major issue.
17:51 Wed 30th Nov 2022
naomi - // AH, you're right on one thing only. Since so much further information has emerged I have changed my position. I'm now even more convinced she has an agenda and is playing the race card in order to further her cause. The woman has not been 'abused', she is not a victim - she is a fraud. //
I would agree that the use of the term 'victim' is emotive, as I explained in my previous response to davebro, as is the overused term 'abuse' which has been misuused in reports of this incident.
Nonetheless, I remain intrigued as to why some, and I think you would agree you are among them, are so very keen to find negative things to say about this woman.
As I see it, in the original incident, she was the wronged party, and constantly dredging up negative information about her does not negate that simple fact, and I don;t understand why you and others are so keen to pursue it - to me the two are completely unconnected.
// Incidentally, I've seen no glee here - but if you think filling your posts with ridiculous language furthers your case, carry on. I think it's rather insulting. //
I don;t think my language is 'ridiculous', and we can agree to differ as to the motivations of the 'information seekers', or which you are happy to admit you are one.
I would agree that the use of the term 'victim' is emotive, as I explained in my previous response to davebro, as is the overused term 'abuse' which has been misuused in reports of this incident.
Nonetheless, I remain intrigued as to why some, and I think you would agree you are among them, are so very keen to find negative things to say about this woman.
As I see it, in the original incident, she was the wronged party, and constantly dredging up negative information about her does not negate that simple fact, and I don;t understand why you and others are so keen to pursue it - to me the two are completely unconnected.
// Incidentally, I've seen no glee here - but if you think filling your posts with ridiculous language furthers your case, carry on. I think it's rather insulting. //
I don;t think my language is 'ridiculous', and we can agree to differ as to the motivations of the 'information seekers', or which you are happy to admit you are one.
Atheist - // Naomi and bobbisox. In what sense is she a fraud? Is it because she is alleged to have another name from the one usually cited? Or is it because she is only pretending to be 'abused'? If it's something else, is there any reliable info about it? //
As I have stated, i think this is an entirely different subject from the one with which we started.
Someone no-one had heard of three days ago shot into the headlines because of an unpleasant incident in which she was the recipient of rude behaviour.
Now, some people seem intent on painting her as some sort of Machiavellian schemer, and for the third time, I confirm my confusion as to why this is happening.
The only thing i can assume, is that in some way, the notion that Ms Fulani is not 'genuine' mitigates the rudeness she received, and of course, it absolutely does not.
If there is another reason for pursuing this line, I will be delighted to be advised what it is, from one or more of those pursuing it.
I wonder if said individuals are moving towards a magic tipping point, where enough negative information about ms Fulani can utterly expunge the responsibility of lady Hussey for what happened, and we can make her the 'victim' instead?
As I have stated, i think this is an entirely different subject from the one with which we started.
Someone no-one had heard of three days ago shot into the headlines because of an unpleasant incident in which she was the recipient of rude behaviour.
Now, some people seem intent on painting her as some sort of Machiavellian schemer, and for the third time, I confirm my confusion as to why this is happening.
The only thing i can assume, is that in some way, the notion that Ms Fulani is not 'genuine' mitigates the rudeness she received, and of course, it absolutely does not.
If there is another reason for pursuing this line, I will be delighted to be advised what it is, from one or more of those pursuing it.
I wonder if said individuals are moving towards a magic tipping point, where enough negative information about ms Fulani can utterly expunge the responsibility of lady Hussey for what happened, and we can make her the 'victim' instead?
AH, //I remain intrigued as to why some, and I think you would agree you are among them, are so very keen to find negative things to say about this woman.//
I, personally, haven't searched anything except the charity she runs - and I did that in order to confirm, for someone else, that it works to support black women only. Some would call that racist. Be intrigued no longer.
Unearthing the truth should never be regarded as 'negative'.
Atheist, she hasn't been abused. That claim alone renders her a fraud.
I, personally, haven't searched anything except the charity she runs - and I did that in order to confirm, for someone else, that it works to support black women only. Some would call that racist. Be intrigued no longer.
Unearthing the truth should never be regarded as 'negative'.
Atheist, she hasn't been abused. That claim alone renders her a fraud.
Naomi at 13.46 - why on earth does your 'trust' matter one iota?
I think I cam state with a degree of certainty that you are not black, or in need if charity support, so the chances of your path and hers crossing is remote to say the least.
So why the need to state to people who couldn't care less that you 'trust her even less ....' when your trust was never remotely required in the first place.
I think I cam state with a degree of certainty that you are not black, or in need if charity support, so the chances of your path and hers crossing is remote to say the least.
So why the need to state to people who couldn't care less that you 'trust her even less ....' when your trust was never remotely required in the first place.
This is tragic. Somewhere in the world you've found a black woman that agrees with your position. So what? There are many more black women who don't agree with you. Does that make you wrong after all? Please, rely on the strength of your own argument, rather than appealing to the meaningless authority of some random woman that none of us have ever heard of.
Your real issue in this case is with the Palace. You don't like it that they invited the undeserving Ngozi Fulani, and you don't like it that they seemingly pressured poor Lady Susan into resigning.
And what you're really hurt by is the fact that a black woman born in Britain and growing up in Britain can get a Palace invite and be so ungrateful! She should have kept her stupid mouth shut - right?
Your real issue in this case is with the Palace. You don't like it that they invited the undeserving Ngozi Fulani, and you don't like it that they seemingly pressured poor Lady Susan into resigning.
And what you're really hurt by is the fact that a black woman born in Britain and growing up in Britain can get a Palace invite and be so ungrateful! She should have kept her stupid mouth shut - right?
