Quote:
|
Originally Posted by punky
Well, well, well, it proves that positive racial discrimination does go on.
|
That's not really news.
But what is galling is that he has the audacity to use the race card to try and defend his own failings, and blame them on others. Ultimately, if he didn't think he was up to the job, he shouldn't have accepted the promotion. But he did accept it, and presumably he would have had training specific to his role in the Royal Protection Team. I can't imagine they pick a bobby of the street and simply hand him a gun and tell him to 'look after Charlie'.
I think there is only one reason this case had the outcome it did:
Quote:
|
Had Sgt Turner's case reached a tribunal, potentially embarrassing secrets about Charles and Camilla's lives may have been aired.
|
Are we allowed to use the term '
blackmail' these days?
---------- Post added at 09:26 ---------- Previous post was at 09:20 ----------
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BBKing
So, all in all, not what it seems. But that's to be expected if you rely on biased second-hand single source information without caveats.
|
Indeed - I think he should have sued on the basis of sexual discrimination:
Quote:
The 46-year-old married officer had been a member of the prince's protection team for seven months until he switched to protecting Camilla Parker Bowles after the announcement that she was to marry the prince.
After four months in that role, he is said to have been replaced by a female inspector.
|
From
The Telegraph.
Now I don't think it so odd that CPB should have been assigned a female protection officer, so his being replaced shouldn't be an issue.
Since the case was never heard, the full extent of the circumstances will never be known.
---------- Post added at 09:28 ---------- Previous post was at 09:26 ----------
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SlackDad
It appears that he was put into a position for reasons other than his skills and abilities, namely the colour of his skin.
|
a.k.a. 'positive discrimination'.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SlackDad
This is not positive discrimination but tokenism. Good luck to him for highlighting this.
|
So it's positive discrimination unless the recipient is unhappy with the result, when it becomes tokenism?
The whole problem with PD is that it IS tokenism, since it is impossible to have PD without overlooking any lack of skill or ability!