Humza Yusaf's resignation speech

Churchill spoke in an era when very few had a TV. So fluffy hair, snappy dressing or a silly face didn't make any impression (won't say gestures as Churchill got those across). Also since Jeremy Paxton, in-your-face no holds barred interviewing is the norm & politicians have zero time to make a complex point, they will be talked over if they try to explain or compare or even leave a significant pause. I don't think oratory wins votes these days, demogoguery does.It's a shame.

Mine too

Maremia

OldFrill, I would understand that if it was the first and only time. But it is not. In Scotland, Labour votes with Tories, time and time again. Check the record.

There was no pact involved. If Yousef hadn't resigned the Greens would have voted the same as Labour and Conservative. I

valdavi

Churchill spoke in an era when very few had a TV. So fluffy hair, snappy dressing or a silly face didn't make any impression (won't say gestures as Churchill got those across). Also since Jeremy Paxton, in-your-face no holds barred interviewing is the norm & politicians have zero time to make a complex point, they will be talked over if they try to explain or compare or even leave a significant pause. I don't think oratory wins votes these days, demogoguery does.It's a shame.

Churchill may not have much exposure on television but he has a wonderful voice for radio.

People did go to the cinema often many years ago and, instead of those annoying adverts, we had short news films before the main film was shown - Pathé News .

Callistemon21

valdavi

Churchill spoke in an era when very few had a TV. So fluffy hair, snappy dressing or a silly face didn't make any impression (won't say gestures as Churchill got those across). Also since Jeremy Paxton, in-your-face no holds barred interviewing is the norm & politicians have zero time to make a complex point, they will be talked over if they try to explain or compare or even leave a significant pause. I don't think oratory wins votes these days, demogoguery does.It's a shame.

Churchill may not have much exposure on television but he has a wonderful voice for radio.

People did go to the cinema often many years ago and, instead of those annoying adverts, we had short news films before the main film was shown - Pathé News .

Mum goes on about cinema in the past, a news programme and a B film and then the main film, and if you went in late you could just sit there and see the things you missed earlier.😁
She doesn’t like cinema now, she says too many ads and too loud.

Oh, you're making me feel very old, Oreo 😁

🤭sorry about that.
She says she also liked the long intermission where you could go to ‘the lav’ then queue up for an ice cream and that the girls selling ices would then walk about looking down the rows of seats for more customers.
The only thing she didn’t like, being a non smoker was all the billowing smoke as so many people ‘lit up’ at that time.
I’ve told her she should write all this down to pass onto our young grandkids.

Apologies for taking this thread for a trip down memory lane.
Normal service will be resumed soon.

Did she mention the double seats in the back row? 😁

GrannyGravy13

Susieq62

Have I missed the racist bit? He was just stating how far we have come over the last 50 years in terms of who leads us. If you closed your eyes and listened to this speech you would have no idea of his colour, age, race, religion. He just sounded quite professional and passionate to me. But then I take people on their actions and behaviours .

He made his white, white, white speech in June 2020

Just checked it out. It was a the height of the Black Lives Matter movement and therefore the speech was specifically on that topic.

www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/comment/humza-yousafs-controversial-white-speech-32575111

this is the whole of the speech. The bit people complain about - inevitably - was only a chunk of the speech that puts it in context.

I didn't find it offensive in the Black Lives Matter context at all. He was right - about how many minorities were represented in powerful roles at the time in Scotland, practically none.

In his resignation speech he alludes to the speech indirectly by saying things had moved on for the better.

^Today 22:30Wyllow3

GrannyGravy13

Susieq62

Have I missed the racist bit? He was just stating how far we have come over the last 50 years in terms of who leads us. If you closed your eyes and listened to this speech you would have no idea of his colour, age, race, religion. He just sounded quite professional and passionate to me. But then I take people on their actions and behaviours .

He made his white, white, white speech in June 2020

Just checked it out. It was a the height of the Black Lives Matter movement and therefore the speech was specifically on that topic.

www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/comment/humza-yousafs-controversial-white-speech-32575111

this is the whole of the speech. The bit people complain about - inevitably - was only a chunk of the speech that puts it in context.

I didn't find it offensive in the Black Lives Matter context at all. He was right - about how many minorities were represented in powerful roles at the time in Scotland, practically none.

In his resignation speech he alludes to the speech indirectly by saying things had moved on for the better^

He was scoring a point suggesting there was structural racism but ignored the fact that 5% of the total MSPs were ethnic minorities- which reflected the percentage of the Scottish population. It's the SNP tactic of deflection and distraction, the truth isn't relevant.

Exactly.
I'm sure he was hoping naive people wouldn't give it the scrutiny that others did.

Black Lives Matter as an organisation is completely discredited now, if anyone is thinking of donating.

The speech was, like most of his actions, very poorly thought through. It alienated many when he should have been striving to promote unity (in his Party). I never understood why he was so capable of shooting himself in the foot. The Hate Bill is, rather fittingly, his awful legacy.

I think a careful reading of the whole speech is important. Including a police statement that no hate crime was committed. He's certainly passionate about racism and who holds the most significant positions of power, not surprising in a Black Lives Matter debate.

Black Lives Matter as an organisation is completely discredited now, if anyone is thinking of donating.

Black Lives Matter is not a single organisation. It was/is a social movement composed of many different groups, still mainly centred in the USA. One can support aspects of it and not others and this is reflected in the breadth of the organisation.

wiki (in depth on the movement)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter

includes

* While there are specific organizations that label themselves "Black Lives Matter", such as the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, the overall movement is a decentralized network with no formal hierarchy.[9] As of 2021, there are about 40 chapters in the United States and Canada.[1] The slogan "Black Lives Matter" itself has not been trademarked by any group.[10]*

The thinly veiled blasphemy bill.

above answer to OldFrill

Donate if you like Wyllow3

Wyllow3

I think a careful reading of the whole speech is important. Including a police statement that no hate crime was committed. He's certainly passionate about racism and who holds the most significant positions of power, not surprising in a Black Lives Matter debate.

He can't do the maths though, that's why his speech was a nonsense. Regardless of whether it was racist or not, anyone in his position should be astute enough to edit a speech so it's not ambiguously contentious (unless that's the intention, and he's not that bright).

Youl have noticed oldfrill Humza beat the vote of no confidence I’m so pleased for him like I said he’s a decent man in my view and many others, better than some I can mention

I SUSPECT that there are some readers/ contributors on this forum who would criticise any person of colour despite their role, positions, background etc. As I say on a regular basis to those with whom I connect, I judge people by their behaviour to me , my family and my community.

Susieq62

I SUSPECT that there are some readers/ contributors on this forum who would criticise any person of colour despite their role, positions, background etc. As I say on a regular basis to those with whom I connect, I judge people by their behaviour to me , my family and my community.

Is that a thinly veiled accusation of racism?

Pretty overt I would say.

Susieq62 If you make a statement like that you need to post the evidence to support it.

Making random accusations like yours without evidence, is in itself a racist statement.

but ignored the fact that 5% of the total MSPs were ethnic minorities- which reflected the percentage of the Scottish population. It's the SNP tactic of deflection and distraction, the truth isn't relevant

Back of the net OldFrill. 👏