My goodness. I got 35 tweets in and he still didn’t hint that he even had a point to get around to, much less start actually making one.

Just jump to 99 & 100 to get the point.

Quite a shaggy dog story… the ending is as dull as you expect.

100.
Because running into the closet and hiding away from everybody else in the room does not address the issue you perceive there to be.

So when you are done with your tantrum, the rest of us will be here waiting for you to return, and until then… pic.twitter.com/aTvEtxjEUD

— James (@JustPikachoo) December 14, 2022

the ending is as dull as you expect.

<surprised Pikachu face> 🙂

When the story of the deeply unpleasant and rude interrogation which Ngozi Fulani was exposed to at the Palace function first broke my curiosity led me to look at Ngozi Fulani’s website to discover more about her.

In my personal opinion it was clear to me from what I saw that Fulani talks what I consider to be a lot of proper nonsense.

Having established that made not one iota of difference to me concerning whether Mrs Hussey behaviour was acceptable, it very clearly wasn’t. Which is precisely why the Palace felt it was appropriate to relieve her of her duties.

Whilst I have not bothered following it at all I understand that an attempt at muck raking has been attempted in recent days. Whatever is discovered or is not discovered does not make one jot of difference imo.

When Mrs Hussey confronted Ngozi Fulani on that occasion at the Palace function she had never met her before and didn’t even know her name. Her behaviour was totally rude, deplorable, and not the protocol you would reasonable expect at such a function.

No amount of whataboutery changes that imo.

Conclusion: she was racially attacked, but she’s a bit of an asshole so some people think that justifies it?

Is that about where we are now? (Not on STW, I mean generally)

How depressingly predictable.

To be honest, having read a bit about Ms Fulani when this first kicked-off, I did wonder how long it would take for people to trawl through her history and turn-up something to discredit her, and (in the minds of some) in doing so discredit her claim of racism. And here we are.

One of the problems that we seem to have at the moment is this absolute tribalism – this notion that you have to either completely agree with everything somebody says/does if they are on “your team”, of completely disagree with everything somebody says/does, if they aren’t.

It’s completely obvious to most sensible people that what Ms Hussey said was racist, and came with a fair dose of condescension thrown in. However, I think most people aren’t attacking her personally – and the discussion seems to be mostly about generational attitudes towards race and “britishness”, and how those have changed…. which is very constructive.

Whatever is discovered about Ms Fulani’s history/charity doesn’t change that – you can simultaneously acknowledge that the questioning from Ms Hussey was racist, but that Ms Fulani’s charity may have acted fraudulently/illegally/unethically. The two things aren’t really connected – unless you really want them to be.

I suppose that the argument of some is that Ms Fulani is a despicable person in general, and here she has twisted/overblown something that an innocent old-dear has said to her, in order to try to characterize it as racist – in order to get publicity for herself/her charity. In doing so she’s dragged the name of the old-dear through the mud.
I don’t see it that way – what was said to Ms. Fulani was clearly racist, and it looks to me that Ms Hussey had several opportunities in the course of that dialogue to correct herself, but instead made it (much) worse. Should Ms Fulani have gone to the media with it, or just reported it to the palace privately and hope the appropriate steps were taken? I think going to the media was the right thing to do – there are clearly still some who don’t understand that racism doesn’t just mean skinheads and swastikas, and so the public discussion needs to continue.

This entire story is purely based on the behaviour of Lady Hussey at a “violence against women and girls” reception event hosted by the Queen Consort at Buckingham Palace. Behaviour which was deemed by the Palace to be “unacceptable and deeply regrettable”.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with Ngozi Fulani’s behaviour at that event.

There is no evidence that Lady Hussey would have behaved in other manner with any other black woman and would not also have demanded to be told where she also came from. There is no evidence that Hussey specifically targeted Fulani who she didn’t know anyway.

It is abundantly clear Lady Hussey feels that she is perfectly entitled to ask any woman who doesn’t appear to be white where she “really comes from”. At least did until her rudeness and unacceptable behaviour became public knowledge.

This whole news story has nothing at all to do with Fulani’s behaviour only Hussey’s behaviour. So discussing Fulani’s behaviour, outside the context of the Buckingham Palace held event anyway, is totally irrelevant and a complete red herring.

Agreed 100%, ernie.

But this is how our right-wing tabloid media operates.

It’s the same as “But the victim had a criminal record” after a US shooting. Makes literally no difference whatsoever.

Or even a UK police shooting. There was an attempt by some to claim that Jean Charles de Menezes would not have been shot dead by Met officers, as he sat on an London Underground train threatening no-one, if he hadn’t overstayed his student visa.

Yep, it basically her fault for the racial discrimination. If she had known her place and left charity work to the professional white people, This would never have happened.

Well done to whoever dug that ‘scandal’ up, and those who shared it. Hope you are proud of yourselves.