She defended the decision to give the prize to Obama. I managed to get
on air and after getting her to very grudgingly admit that the award
flouted the Nobel Foundation's statutes, I caused outrage by suggesting
to her that she was supporting what was objectively an absurd honour for
Obama to receive at this stage of his presidency because she felt a
sense of racial solidarity with him. Amazingly, this being the BBC, I
was not immediately cut off and spent another couple of minutes
battering her over the question, a question which she met with a
mixture of outrage and spluttering bewilderment. Sadly, I was cut off
just when I was poised to mention the 98% black vote for Obama as
evidence of a blind racial support for Obama.

On Friday evening a black American woman Bonnie Greer (the spelling of
the surname may be wrong)  appeared on the BBC R5 Stephen Nolan
programme. Greer is routinely wheeled out when the BBC decide to air a
programme which may give rise to critical comment about Obama. For those
on the list who live outside Britain I should point out that the BBC,
like all mainstream British media, long ago adopted the practice,
wherever practicable, of only employing a relevant ethnic or racial
representative when matters of race and ethnicity are discussed. Where a
white person has to be employed, they are, of course,  expected to adopt
a cringingly non-critical posture towards the subject.

She defended the decision to give the prize to Obama. I managed to get
on air and after getting her to very grudgingly admit that the award
flouted the Nobel Foundation's statutes, I caused outrage by suggesting
to her that she was supporting what was objectively an absurd honour for
Obama to receive at this stage of his presidency because she felt a
sense of racial solidarity with him. Amazingly, this being the BBC, I
was not immediately cut off and spent another couple of minutes
battering her over the question, a question  which she met with a
mixture of outrage and spluttering bewilderment. Sadly, I was cut off
just when I was poised to mention the 98% black vote for Obama as
evidence of a blind racial support for Obama.

There is a lesson here for all those who wish to challenge the
politically correct tyranny. It has been the dominant elite ideology in
the West for so long that its practitioners have grown lazy in their
intellectual defence of it because they are so rarely challenged to
defend the creed. It is also true that once an ideology is not
challenged most of those who espouse it treat it as they do a religion,
they leave the hard intellectual work to the few willing to be the
ideology's "theologians".  All of that being so, anyone with a half-way
decent mind who challenges political correctness is on to a  surefire
winner.

Of course, being politically incorrect can be positively dangerous these
days, easily costing someone their job and in extreme cases resulting in
imprisonment. But it is not that difficult to steer clear of trouble.
The trick is to always stick to the facts, be well prepared, speak in a
reasonable manner and always be formally polite. I have been doing it
for over 40 years without any terminal trouble. Those who do run into
trouble are invariably those who allow themselves to be frightened into
the type of ghastly Maoist-style public confessions of fault which are
now commonplace.

Political correctness meets the criteria for a totalitarian creed
because it stretches into every aspect of life for every aspect can be
subject to the discrimination test which is at the heart of political
correctness and because it claims there is only one "acceptable"
position on any corner of life which it touches, the politically correct
one. Like all totalitarian creeds it needs resisting at every turn. So
the next time someone tries to use the pc hammer to silence you, just
stand up rather than cower and you will find it is a paper hammer.

Keep in the forefront of your mind the fact that thing that any follower
of an ideology fears most is open debate because all ideologies, whether
sacred or profane, are (1) inadequate descriptions of reality and (2)
contain internal contradictions.

As for the award of the Peace Prize, what we really need to know is who
made who made the nomination and to have access to the nomination
papers. Sadly, the Nobel Foundation will not release the latter.  RH

--
Robert Henderson
Blair Scandal website:http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal website:http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk

Robert Henderson wrote:

She defended the decision to give the prize to Obama. I managed to get
on air and after getting her to very grudgingly admit that the award
flouted the Nobel Foundation's statutes, I caused outrage by
suggesting to her that she was supporting what was objectively an
absurd honour for Obama to receive at this stage of his presidency
because she felt a sense of racial solidarity with him. Amazingly,
this being the BBC, I was not immediately cut off and spent another
couple of minutes battering her over the question, a question which
she met with a mixture of outrage and spluttering bewilderment. Sadly,
I was cut off just when I was poised to mention the 98% black vote for
Obama as evidence of a blind racial support for Obama.

They must have cut you out.

09/10/2009
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0070jd4

On Friday evening a black American woman Bonnie Greer (the spelling of the
surname may be wrong) appeared on the BBC R5 Stephen Nolan programme.
Greer is routinely wheeled out when the BBC decide to air a programme
which may give rise to critical comment about Obama. For those on the list
who live outside Britain I should point out that the BBC, like all
mainstream British media, long ago adopted the practice, wherever
practicable, of only employing a relevant ethnic or racial representative
when matters of race and ethnicity are discussed. Where a white person has
to be employed, they are, of course, expected to adopt a cringingly
non-critical posture towards the subject.

She defended the decision to give the prize to Obama. I managed to get on
air and after getting her to very grudgingly admit that the award flouted
the Nobel Foundation's statutes, I caused outrage by suggesting to her
that she was supporting what was objectively an absurd honour for Obama to
receive at this stage of his presidency because she felt a sense of racial
solidarity with him. Amazingly, this being the BBC, I was not immediately
cut off and spent another couple of minutes battering her over the
question, a question which she met with a mixture of outrage and
spluttering bewilderment. Sadly, I was cut off just when I was poised to
mention the 98% black vote for Obama as evidence of a blind racial support
for Obama.

There is a lesson here for all those who wish to challenge the politically
correct tyranny. It has been the dominant elite ideology in the West for
so long that its practitioners have grown lazy in their intellectual
defence of it because they are so rarely challenged to defend the creed.
It is also true that once an ideology is not challenged most of those who
espouse it treat it as they do a religion, they leave the hard
intellectual work to the few willing to be the ideology's "theologians".
All of that being so, anyone with a half-way decent mind who challenges
political correctness is on to a surefire winner.

Of course, being politically incorrect can be positively dangerous these
days, easily costing someone their job and in extreme cases resulting in
imprisonment. But it is not that difficult to steer clear of trouble.

As for the award of the Peace Prize, what we really need to know is who
made who made the nomination and to have access to the nomination papers.
Sadly, the Nobel Foundation will not release the latter. RH

Obama richly deserved to be given the Nobel Peace Prize. He has worked hard
for peace, by offering conciliatory messages to Iran, working to reduce
nuclear weapons, abolishing the Star Wars defence system, helping to curb
Israel's aggression and by demonstrating that America now respects the rule
of law rather than force of arms, and will no longer torture captives or
bully smaller nations.

Unfortunately you won't read much about Obama's achievements in the UK press
because to the average newspaper editor, Obama is that black geezer who got
elected as a triumph for the black rights movement, ennit.

I think we have
to face facts: our press is not the best in the world, any more than our
policemen are the best. Our press is shite. The Nobel prize committee is
not responsible for making up the deficiencies in Robert Henderson's
education, or anyone's.

In message <7je2nqF3503ihU1 at (no spam) mid.individual.net>, Blue <blue at (no spam) there.com
writes




They must have cut you out.

09/10/2009
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0070jd4


There's a surprise. I was the first caller of the night as well. RH

"Robert Henderson" <philip at (no spam) anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:lrKIUavEze0KFw0K at (no spam) anywhere.demon.co.uk...
In message <7je2nqF3503ihU1 at (no spam) mid.individual.net>, Blue <blue at (no spam) there.com
writes




They must have cut you out.

09/10/2009
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0070jd4


There's a surprise. I was the first caller of the night as well. RH


They didn't cut you out, Robert - well not entirely anyway. You come on
just after 10 minutes into the programme.

It is clear, though, from your comments, and what is actually broadcast on
iplayer, that they have severely edited your contribution. But what do you
expect from the BBC - honesty and free speech!


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00n2vv7

"Farmer Giles" <Giles at (no spam) nospam.com> wrote in message
news:QK6dndGURIBekE_XnZ2dnUVZ8kWdnZ2d at (no spam) brightview.com...

"Robert Henderson" <philip at (no spam) anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:lrKIUavEze0KFw0K at (no spam) anywhere.demon.co.uk...
In message <7je2nqF3503ihU1 at (no spam) mid.individual.net>, Blue <blue at (no spam) there.com
writes

They must have cut you out.

09/10/2009
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0070jd4

There's a surprise. I was the first caller of the night as well. RH

They didn't cut you out, Robert - well not entirely anyway. You come on
just after 10 minutes into the programme.

It is clear, though, from your comments, and what is actually broadcast on
iplayer, that they have severely edited your contribution. But what do you
expect from the BBC - honesty and free speech!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00n2vv7

"Risen without any talent or achievement" was Robert's description of Obama.
I greatly admire the American lady, Bonny, for keeping her cool despite
Robert's ignorance and stupidity. I don't think he deserved a second more
of airtime, and I find it surprising that he should bring this rather
humiliating exchange to our attention.

The Nobel citation is at
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html

It makes good sense, unless you measure contribution towards peace only in
terms of how many troops are withdrawn from a conflict.

"Robert Henderson" <philip at (no spam) anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:lrKIUavEze0KFw0K at (no spam) anywhere.demon.co.uk...
In message <7je2nqF3503ihU1 at (no spam) mid.individual.net>, Blue <blue at (no spam) there.com
writes



They must have cut you out.

09/10/2009
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0070jd4

There's a surprise. I was the first caller of the night as well. RH


They didn't cut you out, Robert - well not entirely anyway. You come on just
after 10 minutes into the programme.

It is clear, though, from your comments, and what is actually broadcast on
iplayer, that they have severely edited your contribution. But what do you
expect from the BBC - honesty and free speech!


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00n2vv7

"Farmer Giles" <Giles at (no spam) nospam.com> wrote in message
news:QK6dndGURIBekE_XnZ2dnUVZ8kWdnZ2d at (no spam) brightview.com...

"Robert Henderson" <philip at (no spam) anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:lrKIUavEze0KFw0K at (no spam) anywhere.demon.co.uk...
In message <7je2nqF3503ihU1 at (no spam) mid.individual.net>, Blue <blue at (no spam) there.com
writes




They must have cut you out.

09/10/2009
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0070jd4


There's a surprise. I was the first caller of the night as well. RH


They didn't cut you out, Robert - well not entirely anyway. You come on
just after 10 minutes into the programme.

It is clear, though, from your comments, and what is actually broadcast
on iplayer, that they have severely edited your contribution. But what do
you expect from the BBC - honesty and free speech!


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00n2vv7

"Risen without any talent or achievement" was Robert's description of
Obama. I greatly admire the American lady, Bonny, for keeping her cool
despite Robert's ignorance and stupidity. I don't think he deserved a
second more of airtime, and I find it surprising that he should bring this
rather humiliating exchange to our attention.

The Nobel citation is at
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html

It makes good sense, unless you measure contribution towards peace only in
terms of how many troops are withdrawn from a conflict.

The Nobel citation is at
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html

It makes good sense, unless you measure contribution towards peace only in
terms of how many troops are withdrawn from a conflict.


Or you measure it on the basis of something actually achieved!

Perhaps you could tell us precisely what he has actually achieved -
particularly in the *preceding* year?

All we've heard so far is rhetoric and platitudes. If that is to be the
criteria, then every politician in the world should get a prize!

She defended the decision to give the prize to Obama. I managed to get
on air and after getting her to very grudgingly admit that the award
flouted the Nobel Foundation's statutes,