« Contraceptive house prices | Main | Cameron and Reid make most of August opportunities - but is Brown happiest? »


Behold, the power of the Blogs. Anyway I sent Jackson my comments and received the following:

""Mr Coles.

Thanks for your mail.

To clarify, the suspension of an employee is not intended to imply that the
employee in question has done wrong. It is a neutral act that allows us to
conduct a full investigation and reach a conclusion based on facts. I will
gladly update you regarding the outcome of the investigation.

Kind regards


The words mouthed and mealy come to mind.

While it is always encouraging to see the bloggers take up the fight I fear they are attacking the wrong group. Orange needed to be pressed to keep Inigo but I feel that their "suspension" was a ruse to make MPAC feel like they have achieved something. Orange is now in a catch-22 and pressure should be applied to MPAC and other so-called Muslim groups who obviously cannot take a joke . So while we should support Inigo and support Orange in their attempt to sort out this mess, never forget who caused it in the first place: a Muslim pressure group doing further damage to an already battered Islamic community.

The Independent's report on this was far more impressive than the Telegraph's. Not often I say that! The Indy got the point about freedom of speech - the Telegraph made no attempt to look at that at all - I hope it raises its game if it ever comes back to this.

"So while we should support Inigo and support Orange in their attempt to sort out this mess, never forget who caused it in the first place: a Muslim pressure group doing further damage to an already battered Islamic community."

Sean's right about this. As I have just posted on the Home Page editorial thread @0949:

"Inigo's crime was to point out the way that the Left's abuse of language has been a potent weapon in "the culture war". His critics have not tried to engage him in argument - they have simply tried to hound him out of his job. That proves his point 100%. But make no mistake - this is not based on any inability to understand - this is clearly a deliberate attempt to take him down based on a wilful misconstruction of his article."

I think the Telegraph piece yesterday just came off the press wires and was put on the website, I don't think it was written by Telegraph staff. I suspect they will follow it up with a better piece.

"It would have been sensible - certainly, with the benefit of hindsight - for Mr Wilson to have written anonymously, as most of the MPAC forum contributors who orchestrated the campaign against him do. " Hurry up Harry quote.

Ah but commendably Inigo Wilson has the courage of his convictions, nowadays sadly a quality in rapid decline.

Hannibal 1011 - you may be right. In that case they would do better to drop the current piece from the website & come up with something more substantial. At the moment all they are doing is taking Inigo's article out of context.

The more of Inigo's definitions I read the more amusing they seem to be. Surely there is one Moslem in the world who has a sense of humour, and finds Inigo funny. (What do Moslems laught at, if not satire?)

At least The Guardian list out a few of his definitions. My guess is that the more the public read them, the more they will like it. I hope we invite Inigo back to Conservative Home soon. At last we have anti-PC hero. If they make him a martyr, they will only strengthen the anti-PC cause...and Inigo will be more famous than he ever thought possible.

MPAC are acting as the censor to the nation, having decided to take offence at Wilson's comments.
It is this act that only just confirms people's perceptions of organisations like MPAC that they are part of the Isalmofascist assault on this country.
Yet again we are seeing the intolerance displayed by the Muslim society in this country towards anyone not of the faith. It is sad that they feel this vulnerability and the need to strike out all the time, after-all we live in a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural country. This paranoia against the UK comes about as they have not bothered to adapt or assimilate to the British way.
What though is even sadder, is that MPAC is supposedly comprised of moderates and have an intercourse with government, which is something that needs to be rethought.
Inigo Wilson has been sought as a scalp to muslim fundamentalism and as a means to restrict the liberties of all in this country. At no time did he mention his employment with Orange, yet these fanatics tracked his employmers down, wrote an agressive and decidedly skewed complaint and demanded his removal on spurious grounds. The fact that Orange have suspended him rather than respond in a robust way has shown that intolerance is winning.
We should all threaten to curtail our Orange contracts, but more importantly we need to support Wilson, even if he has been foolish. We cannot allow an organisation to act as a censor to a nation, and cannot allow our right to free speech to be curtailed, particularly when it does not incite. Islam is once again demonstrating its intolerance to the West and needs to be faced robustly.

Perhaps someone should remind the Orange human resources department that not two years ago, their charitable arm sponsored a little booklet called "the A-Z of Free Expression", published by Index on Censorship, and send it to them.

Great spot Peter. Here's an excerpt from Index on Censorship's website, about some debates also sponsored by Orange, which the publication was linked to:

"To further support and promote the themes of the Orange Index Debates, Orange and Index on Censorship are also publishing "The A-Z of Free Expression" which will include contributions from writers and social commentators from around the world.

Denise Lewis, Orange Group Director of Corporate Affairs, said: "Orange Index Debates is ... building on Orange's longstanding commitment to encouraging debate and providing a platform for people to communicate and share their passions. This debating platform was created to challenge audiences - we want people to get involved, share their view and use this as a forum for debate."

As Orange is now discovering, freedom comes with a cost. Orange needs our support to encourage it to rediscover & stand firm in its commitment to free expression and against those who want to shut down debate.


Orange ad's have a terrific sense of humour.........................it will be a big blow to Orange's image if they don't support Inigo. I'm sure in the end they will.

I'm still waiting for a Moslem to tell me something which they think is funny. If Moslems don't have a sense of humour, then I can see why they have a problem. It would be good if we could understand the Moslem mentality better, and knowing how their humour works would be helpful.

I thought Inigo's lexicon was very funny, and he made the point throughout that a lot of "politically correct" statements classify people by racial, sexual, religious classifications rather than
by their ideas and actions. He also ironically pointed out that racist, sexist etc are often terms people use to shut others up, which has happened to him. Unless Inigo was writing this lexicon at work and putting it on their website Orange should not be able to sack him and even then they should have a sense of humour. Shame on Orange.

I found the following comment on this on Samizdata. I think it says it all. To think that my father spent his entire working life in the Admiralty to keep this country free of Communism. Why did he bother?


That's the way communism worked during the 1970's-1980's in Czechoslovakia. I remember it very well from my family.

People got fired for their political opinions, and anybody could have been spied by the omnipresent StB (State Security). If you were found "politically unreliable", your job choices were drastically limited to low-paid menial jobs.

It's important to note that in today's Czech Republic no employer would dare to fire a worker for his blog or for his/her non-work-related public statements. This is just unthinkable.

Posted by PK at August 18, 2006 09:46 AM

I have contacted Mr Jackson by email. As a director of an IT company, who use and recommend Orange, I have explained that if the outcome of this affair is detrimental to Inigo Wilson, this relationship will cease, and I will specifically deter my customers from using Orange in the future.

This will not be by way of protest, but in their own interests. I cannot recommend a company that 'folds' under pressure from an alarmist pressure group in stable voice and data solutions.

Don't direct your anger at Orange. Inform them at your displeasure IF they get rid of them but a "suspension" eerily sounds like "we are sening a message so that the Muslim community won't get angry at us". Direct your attention to the debate-stiffling MPAC and other associations who have ignored talk in favour of boycott.

It is MPAC who deserves your disdain, Orange is doing what any other company would do under these circumstances and appear to be doing something when in fact they are doing nothing. Pressure Orange to keep him, do not blame Orange.

I read on another thread that Arab bloggers are discussing the issue and that there fore Orange wil "have to" sack the man or lose custom. In other words, by publicly dfending free speech we are putting Orange in the position where they will be "forced" to sack someone for exercising free speech. There is always a price to be paid for freedom. Every time we give in to threats it only gets harder in future.

The most effective is probably what Guido reports was result of CHomes Deputy Editor Sam Coates's "discussion" with MPAC on Asian Network yesterday - letting their own words show what a mean spirited lot they are.

Why no mention Sam?

Anonmouse of course kicked this off and led the campaign from its inception. One comment made by a lot of people is that as a public face of Orange he should have been wary of posting controversial comments. However if you look at the original article, it didnt state the company name. He was posting as himself, not in any capacity as an employee of Orange.

We cant give in on this. This is on a matter of principle. Anonmouse's case as we can clearly see through the editorial before, is non-existant. It was clear that there was noting really to object to if you read the comment in context of the whole article. Anonmouse when angry that s/he wasnt beoing believed started accusing others, including me, of racism instead of responding to our perfectly reasonable questions. MPAC and the moderators of the forum must be held responsible to for allowing this to happen under their watch. By not acting to stop this, they have essentially helped it.

I urge the media to continue pushing the story and calling for Orange to not give in to demands from MPAC which is acting totally unreasonably. Stand up for freedom of speech...

Thinking further about this, for Inigo Jones' article to be offensive to significant numbers of Orange customers, we must presume that a significant number of Orange customers:-

(a) read ConservativeHome regularly, and
(b) got really wound up about his article, and
(c) were so wound up about it that they made inquiries to find out where he worked, and (d) complained to Orange, and
(e) never thought to complain to Inigio Jones personally or to ConservativeHome about what he'd written.

Is that how large numbers of the general public ordinarily behave, or is it how spiteful and fanatical pressure groups behave?

What do you think?

Sam mentioned his interview at 10.29 yesterday on main thread on this issue

Sean, nobody declared themselves offended by it until MPAC misrepresented it two weeks later.

In fact, judging by the comments by the more regular CH readers on his article it has got to be one of the most popular we have ever published.

That the definitions were his literal opinions never occurred to anybody who read the full article.

The annoying thing is that if they objected, why didnt they post on the article saying so, or alternatively email either the Editor or the Deputy Editor, a much more polite way of dealing with it?

"That the definitions were his literal opinions never occurred to anybody who read the full article."

That is the key to what's going on here Sam.

It is simply impossible to read his original article without understanding what he was getting at (whether or not you agree with him). This is not a case of misunderstanding, this is a deliberate attempt to damage Inigo and Orange, by wilfully taking his words out of context so as to give them a meaning other than that which they had when originally used.

The real villains of the piece are not Orange, who find themselves in an invidious position, but those who are trying to destroy the livelihood and reputation of one individual, as well as attack the company that he works for.

We have to draw a line in the sand somewhere & say that satire & free speech must be defended, & that private individuals and companies should be able to get on with life without having to face this sort of concerted onslaught.

James, I don't know about Tim but I know that I didn't recieve any "polite objections", even after things kicked off.

It seems like this A Murphy character on the thread started off a lot of it by e-mailed Orange. Sneaky little lefty.

Of course Muslims have a sense of humour - only not when it is directed at them.


This is rib-ticklingly funny, Peter.


Well, done CH for the campaign. This sort of unthinking corporate kneejerk pandering to the _perception_ of what the media might demand needs to be challenged.

This is NOT Wilson vs MPAC

The people who complained were simply using mpac’s forum. I know this because I am one of these muslims that Tim Montgomerie at ConservtiveHome calls an extremist muslim because I complained. Are we not allowed to complain if we are offended?

I am not a member of mpac. I visited their forum 5 days ago. I wrote a template email of complant about Mr Wilson and posted it and emailed it to other muslims. Hundreds of us complained and hardly any were from mpac. Muslims complained not mpac. Muslims.

And why did we complain? because we are fed up of racism and fed up of islamophobia. Here’s an example for those who may think there is no islamophobia or racism against us. Its happening every single day. Yesterday in the Sun, 17 August 2006, Kelvin Mackenzie said these vile things:

“Could the Muslims stop alienating me and, more importantly, trying to kill me?

“Let’s get one thing clear. The vast majority of this country have done nothing but welcome people to these shores no matter how evil their background and religion.”

“The suicide bombers come from one ethnic group.”

“Certainly I would like to see some young Muslims in this country restricted from flying to Pakistan. And if they did go they would have to wear electronic tags so that intelligence authorities would be able to keep track of them.”

What Inigo said offended us muslims not mpac. We just used their forum just like now im using yours.

James Maskell thinks there is no such thing as Islamophobia... thats why I and others HAD to complain.

Yes, Anonmouse, we all know that ordinary members of the public create template e-mails and complain to peoples' employers about articles that they have neither the wit nor the courage to attempt to refute in their own names.

You are a cowardly, mean, lying, troll, who should crawl back under whichever stone you emanated from.

I certainly am not phobic about Islam, Anonmouse. I am scared witless of being blown up however. There is a likelihood currently that were that to happen, the perpetrator would be of the Muslim faith.

To say that Islam is an evil religion is crazy. It is not. However, some (a small minority) of it's adherants are perpetrating truly evil deeds IN IT'S NAME.

Sadly, it is therefore inevitable that comments like those of Mr McKenzie will be made. I certainly don't support them, but I do understand them. Surely your energies would be better placed in countering those sympathies by showing that the vast majority of those who follow your faith want a peaceful life and have no ill feeling to those of different faiths.

The way that you Islamic prima donnas are behaving there's one certainty - there will never be such a thing as Islamophilia.

I would like to echo Sean Fears' comment 'anmouse'.We have the courage to blog under our real names and stand up to justify our opinions unlike you who is so cowardly he/she has to make your utterly unfounded allegations under a false name and email address.

and what's more, malcolm, so did Inigo blog under his real name. People can have good reasons for blogging under a pseudonym, and debate can often be more frank if they do.

the risks of real name blogging are obvious. the rewards are less so!

Another email for Stuart Jackson here.

Orange haven't come out of this at all well have they? In my mind, they would have been better off dismissing the original complaints by distancing themselves from Inigo Wilson's article and leaving it at that. Still, hindsight's a wonderful thing isn't it?

I disagree tapestry. You clearly do not blog under your own name. Why? What are you scared of? If you have an opinion, and want to voice it (as is your right in a democratic society) you should have the guts to say who you are.

Anomynous blogging DOES NOT encourage frank debate. It merely means that those who are too cowardly to use their real names are free to voice outrageous viewpoints.

Have some guts - say who you are, or shut the **** up.

Tapestry,also known as William,Henry Curteis etc, I really don't see why anyone who genuinely believes in what they're saying should not blog under their real name as I do.Inigo Wilson is a victim of a bunch of rather stupid cowards who I feel it is my duty to stand up to.

Anonmouse it is my right to think and say whatever I believe about Islam, just as it is a Muslims right to think and say what they like about Christianity. Many Holy books are "phobic" about those who do not believe what the wrtiers do. I can be Socialistphobic, Footballphobic, Mormonphobic, Toynbeephobic if I want. It's not racist because the muslim religion isn't race based - unlike Sikhism or to a degree Judiasm.

What I shouldn't be able to do under law is unlawfully discriminate against a muslim in the public sphere on the basis of their religion.

You however are trying to pressure an organisation to fire someone because you don't agree with them - not because they have broken any law but purely because you don't share their sense of humour and find it obnoxious. If I find a post by you attacking Americans - should I assume you are racist? should I search out who you are and try to humiliate you or get you fired?

"Tapestry" in this case the individual concerned has not blogged under his real name because he is a very nasty piece of work who wishes to make false allegations anonymously - the hallmark of a coward.

How could you, Ted? Anonmouse hasn't the courage to post under their real name.

You won't be able to do that Ted.Anonmouse is too cowardly to let you know who he/she really is.

malcolm. no more hints. my first name on CH was a campaigning name. I was banned from this site, so had to adopt a new id. since then i've started a blog and today thought i'd upgrade to my blog name. one step at a time.

Sean Fear's '"Tapestry" in this case the individual concerned has not blogged under his real name because he is a very nasty piece of work who wishes to make false allegations anonymously - the hallmark of a coward.' is highly complimentary. I wish I could fulfil his expectations...er any examples, Sean?

I liked Sean's version of Moslem humour..but do they have any jokes other than about mass murder? I'm sure your average moslem does have more breadth than the average holocaust denier. That's the kind of humor I was interested in, your every day variety.

as for names, what about Guido? Serf? and a thousand other famous examples of pseudonyms? The blogosphere has been built on pseudonyms. You lot are catching the one-dimensionality much in eveidence on this thread. Lighten up eh!

You condemn A Murphy for her comments re. Hezbollah. Well, you would, being pro-Israeli. Of course many people do not share you views. As Mary Robinson, former High Commissioner for Human Rights said, a few minutes ago on both Sky News and BBC News, the problem did not start with Hezbollah; it started with the occupation of Lebanon by Israel and Israel's contravention of UN resolutions.

Why don't you use your resources to call for Israel to start obeying international law?

Or would that scare off some of the Conservative Party's pro-Israeli donors?

Selina, you're off topic. Look around and there'll be a thread suitable for your point somewhere, as long as Selina is your real name that is, or is it Linda as in your email address?!!

Tapestry, do keep up: I was replying to a comment by Iain Dale, whose comment on the Inigo Wilson/Orange topic is quoted above. Visitors to Conservativehome.blog will read Iain's comment

Some of us who comment under pseudonyms do so from the very real fear of losing our jobs.

Anyone working in the Public Sector who openly expressed what Mr Wilson wrote would be sacked for gross misconduct under the terms of the Race Relations Amendment Act (2000), which puts a legal obligation on ALL public servants to 'promote good race relations'.

Anonmouse, you complained to Orange about Inigo Wilson because I said that I do not believe that Islamophobia exists? Do you not recognise that I denied the existance of Islamophobia a long time after you called upon MPAC readers to complain to Orange over Inigo Wilson? Im talking hours afterwards.

If you have a problem with the comments I have made, then address them to me directly (either you can post them here or you can email me on the email address I link to on every single post I make on this site) or complain to the Editor or to the Deputy Editor (MPAC members welcome to also do so). Inigo has rightfully avoided any discussion about this topic. Im willing to defend him as I believe from the bottom of my heart that he was perfectly entitled to post the article as he did.

You have called me a racist in the past 24 hours. You blame me because I deny such a thing as Islamophobia. Islamophobia doesnt exist. Its a psychological frame of mind a radical muslim imposes upon themselves to protect themselves from the fact that its their problem and that they are unable, or unwilling, to deal with it. I am not a racist. I spent a year in Nairobi, Kenya and spent the vast majority of my time with Africans and an Asian family. We got on really well and I was happy to live there for that time. It was a great experience and I hope to revisit that area in the future sometime.

I ask you one more time: Under what definition of "Islamophobia" and "racism" do you judge Inigo Wilson? You MUST answer the question. Write a post as long or as short as you want. You can email your definitions to me if you wish or you can post them here. Its completely up to you.

"The way that you Islamic prima donnas are behaving there's one certainty - there will never be such a thing as Islamophilia."

I think you'll find there is such a thing. We are not all bigotted Tories John Coles - step out of your cosy little affluent white Conservative bubble and you might just see that for yourself.

To the rest of you so scared of being blown up by all the scary Muslims under the bed - get a life!

James Maskell, I think you are wasting your breath. You won't get an answer - not only has this cowardly and distateful individual refused to post under his/her name, he/she has refused consistantly to answer the request to justify their charges. Clearly he/she can't.

This simply proves that the whole thing is a cowardly ploy to supress free speech. And with apologies in advance to Cardinal Pirelli, that IS behaviour of a fascistic nature.

The worm has turned @ 19.12:

"Anyone working in the Public Sector who openly expressed what Mr Wilson wrote would be sacked for gross misconduct under the terms of the Race Relations Amendment Act (2000), which puts a legal obligation on ALL public servants to 'promote good race relations'. "

Why then would they be sacked. NOTHING that Mr. Wilson wrote contravenes that directive. The best way to promote good race relations is to laugh at ourselves occassionally.

Anonmouse, don't get wound up by this bunch, if they admit that there is such a thing as 'Islamophobia' then they will also have to admit that they are prime examples of Islamophobes. Of course it exists, we see it in the media and in our government's policies every single day and have done so for the last 5 years in order to further the 'War on Terror' (which really doesn't exist). The Tories on here are either very easily manipulated by the order of the day or they are just pretending to be so that they can display their prejudices (that their public schools instilled in them) in all their glory. You did the right thing complaining to Orange - we should keep up these complaints until this vile individual is removed completely (although if he had any common sense he would do everyone a favour and resign...but then again this is a man supposedly in PR for a mobile phone giant who told a newspaper "If anything the most dangerous health effects come from using handsets rather than from living near masts." so it's not as if he's the brightest tool in the box :-D )

John Baker, as a former state school pupil, all I was doing was supporting the request for a coward who won't post under his/her name because they are scared so to do to define this 'Islamophobia' that he/she first accused Mr Wilson of.

Not an unreasonable request, but then we are not unreasonable people - we post under our real names. Anommouse has simply ignored that request throughout the whole thread.

As for the War on terror not existing, tell that to the 3600 or so inncoents who would have lost their lives due to misplaced allegiance to the Islam had our 'warriors' in this war not stopped the plot.

I wonder what Anonmouse thought of this evening's Now show on Radio 4. It is repeated tomorrow I believe.
We could debate the sketch on profiling aircraft passengers.
Will Anonmouse be complaining to the BBC?

"Yesterday in the Sun, 17 August 2006, Kelvin Mackenzie said these vile things:"

Then why haven't the public risen up to demand this vile man be sacked?

"Of course it exists, we see it in the media and in our government's policies every single day"

Then why has nobody done anything to counter this? Perhaps because the sort of people who moan about these things are an unrepresentative minority who insist on pestering the rest of us with their self-righteous crusades.

NigelC - what time is it on? I shall try and have have a listen and report back if you can provide details. Dont the BBC record all there shows now for playback from their website?

John Baker - Don't worry I know how to deal with right-wing bigots so they won't succeed in winding me up.

whoever - "We have the courage to blog under our real ... blah blah blah" - Choosing to write under a pseudonym is my prerogative and is one that has been enjoyed by british men and women forever. I believe it is part of my freedom of speech to write anonymously if I choose to do so. If there is something wrong with doing so then please direct your ire at Tim and Tom who run the site. Until then, I will writhe on in my anonymity.

Anonmouse, what is your definition of "Islamophobia" and "racism"? As long or as short a definition as you so wish.

I just find this whole incident very saddening, and the saddest thing of all is that I've absolutely no doubt that the eventual outcome of this whole debacle is that the Muslim extremist lobbyists -- who are trying to disallow any criticism of themselves -- are going to win.

I do find it odd that these people are always claiming to be so persecuted -- they are always complaining about how badly they are treated by the media, by the government, and by everyone else -- and yet they knew full well that they had it in their power to have Inigo Wilson suspended from his job. This tells me that they are not ignorant of the power that political correctness possesses, the way that it is pointed to their advantage, and they are fully willing to use it for their own ends.

Their feeling of "persecution" is not half as sincere as they'd have us believe.

As better men than I have said freedom of speech is the freedom to offend, freedom to be inoffensive isn't a freedom worth having. Kelvin Mackenzie is using this freedom. Anonmouse is using that freedom and is welcome to do so, he/she has the freedom to boycott a company and its goods and to recommend others do so. That's the glory of living in a country with a long history of enlighted thinking.

Fortunately I also have this freedom and can express my offense at and contempt of his/her actions.

That freedom stops however when it becomes violent or criminal. There are certain comments posted on threads he/she has posted to on MPAC which are IMHO so abusive as to be likely to go into areas covered by criminal law.

On the picture that Anonmouse links to, was the creator of that picture given permission by the owners of Orange to use the trademark? If not, is that not breaking copyright law?

Yes you have the right not to give your real name. I just feel that it is symptomatic of your base cowardice that you choose not to. Most people arguing against you, and some in your support, aren't scared to identify themselves.

When will you answer the question put by James Maskell? (If ever)

more like infringement of the trade mark, if it's a registered trademark. but there's probably no loss

can't see the link. haven't seen what you are talking about

We all believe in freedom of speech.
But Inigo Wilson is a community affairs manager for Orange. His comments suggest a lack of sensitivity for the feelings of some of our communities. They affect his ability to do his job. Can you imagine a government relations manager condemning the Conservative party? (Or Labour or the Lib Dems.)

actually a lot of people don't believe in freedom of speech

hence these new laws about glorification of terrorism, religion etc

In the radio interview its clear MPAC has no case whatsoever. Ashgar destroyed his case. Completely blown to pieces. Hes attacked the other panellist, calling him pro-Israeli! Sam ("this other chap") didnt have to say much at all, nor did he need to ad much to it. Ashgar spontaneously conbusted live on air. He hated being asked a direct question...wait a sec...is Anonmouse Ashgar?

What's this obsession with 'real names' - who even knows what is 'real' on the internet? How do we know that you are really using your real names? There are many things that could prove you are 'cowardly' in life, but not using your real name on an internet blog doesn't spring to mind as one of them. You lot ain't half weird..

I should mention at least two more blogs for the roll of honour: This Sceptered Isle points out the nature of MPAC, and L'Ombre de l'Olivier for achiving the lexicon in case something happened to force it off ConHome (which it won't, but it's the thought that counts).

There are many more, three of the biggest US blogs included.

Thank you.

If anyone has the video clip for Iain Dales appearance on More 4 discussing this please youtube it or share link. TIA

http://www.stuartbruce.biz/2006/08/inigo_wilson_no.html for a different opinion.

Anonmouse, what is your definition of "Islamophobia" and "racism"? You have accused Inigo Wilson, amongst others of these, so please explain. If you complained based on your understanding of the terms then its only fair that you justify the complaint by explaining the terms.

Why keep asking the same questions James?Anonmouse never justifies itself probably because it can't.It's also as has been discussed before a complete coward as is therefore best ignored.

As I posted on Donal Blaney's thread - is there any truth in the comment posted a couple of days ago, that anonymouse is one "Matthew Hopkins"???? If so, is he a muslim convert?? Check my other post, anonymouse, before you start to hurl abuse at this harmless old lady.


Surely not!

"You did the right thing complaining to Orange - we should keep up these complaints until this vile individual is removed completely (although if he had any common sense he would do everyone a favour and resign)..."

What is it with the complete inability of some people to distinguish between remarks made in a personal capacity and comments made on behalf of Orange?

Inigo Wilson's article had nothing to do with Orange and this vendetta being waged against him is nothing more than a petty, small-minded, spite-filled campaign to ruin a decent man's career for daring to poke fun at the oversensitivity and intolerance of leftists.

"As I posted on Donal Blaney's thread - is there any truth in the comment posted a couple of days ago, that anonymouse is one "Matthew Hopkins"???? If so, is he a muslim convert?? Check my other post, anonymouse, before you start to hurl abuse at this harmless old lady."

Please could you report to the conservativeHome website every single occasion where I have hurled abuse at anyone let alone a lady.

"slur": Any whimsical remark aimed at Muslims

"oranges": People who only laugh at jokes about non-muslims

Couldn't the Fat Lady sing on this one?

Tapestry, your last post is very offensive. It upsets all of us who may be a few pounds, sorry Kilos, overweight. It is an insult to the rotunds in Britain.

You are clearly suffering from Rotundophobia. I demand that you be fired from you job immediately.

Ah, tracked down those definitions. Im going blind I swear!

Islamophobia - an irrational fear of Islam. Im trying to picture Inigo sat down at his computer typing away as normal but then comes across the word "Islam". He runs from the room screaming a high pitched wail. He has to call a friend because he couldnt possibly go back into that room. He still wakes up in a cold sweat after having nightmares of the word "Islam". Im sure Edgar Allan Poe wrote something along this line in the past.

Oh please...

Jon White | August 18, 2006 at 19:27

Why then would they be sacked. NOTHING that Mr. Wilson wrote contravenes that directive. The best way to promote good race relations is to laugh at ourselves occassionally.

You and I both know that the best defence against the tyrrany of the extreme Left and extreme Right is a sense of humour (especially a sense of the ridiculous - I understand that Oswald Mosley didn't attact a mass following in this country precisely because most English people found his uniforms, goose-stepping and facist salutes frankly silly).

But that is exactly what the internal rules and regulations written by the Civil Service to enforce the legislation do not make any allowances for. They have an entire hierarchy of 'political' officers, whose sole job is to enforce 'Equality and Diversity'. It is an open invitation to any individual with a grudge to settle scores by claiming that a remark or behaviour by you was 'racist', 'sexist' or 'homophobic'. Every complaint must be investigated; there is no requirement for witnesses. What is worse, it depends entirely on the person being offended perceiving something as offensive. Intent does not have to be proved. It is frankly beginning to feel like Communist East Germany.

I thought Wilson's piece was asinine, but I am outraged at Orange's treatment of him. It's another example of the growing phenomenon of Contract Feudalism: the bargaining power of employers has increased until they can credibly claim the right to monitor employees for off-hours "thoughtcrimes."

"It seems like this A Murphy character on the thread started off a lot of it by e-mailed Orange. Sneaky little lefty."

It is remarkable that a few people have named little old me as one of the people to ’start’ the campaign against Inigo Wilson. My comments below Wilson’s blog were on the 15th August and the campaign had started on at least the 11th August (see MPAC’s thread on the matter). It is probably just another example of Tories not being able to look further than the end of their own noses however. Incidentally, I would not be ashamed to admit it if it were indeed myself that had got the ball rolling - on the contrary, I would be quite pleased with myself. But for the record, it wasn’t me - I heard about the controversy as it was reaching something of a climax, as is demonstrated by the fact that he was suspended not long after my comments were made.

The fact that you would be pleased with yourself Athena Murphy just demonstrates what a hunourless, sad, person you are. Clearly you are in favour of repression of free speech, hounding people who dare to express an opinion contary to yours, bigotted, and a generally unlikeable piece of work.

A senior position within NuLab awaits you, I have no doubt.

I take it you've not got a lot of friends, Athena.


What happened to the analysis you promised to email on politicalbetting.com? :(

While I fully support this man's right to freedom of speech I wonder how much support he would be getting if he had been accused of anti-Semitism rather than Islamophobia.

I'm guessing some of his most fervent champions would have had rather less to say on the matter.

Can we not have creepy racists on this site?

John G - this may be pedantic, but should be pointed out. To be accused of ANTI-Semeticism implies an irrational prejudice against Jewish people. To be accused of IslamoPHOBIA implies a FEAR of Islam (and presumably Muslims). It does not imply an irrational prejudice against followers of the Islamic faith.

Right, I'm off to sew some patches on my anorak.

Surely a "phobia" is an irrational fear?

Yes James, an irrational FEAR. NOT however an irrational prejudice against.

e.g. I'm scared of spiders (actually, I'm not, but go with the example) so I have a phobia. I do not regard spiders as second class creatures who should all be exterminated, so I'm not anti-Spider.

Islamophobia implies fear of Islam (and I think we can safely say of Muslims). However, fear does not imply hatred.

(I'm really sorry that I started this now)

The Orange PR man must go. The reasons are well outlined below:

As a Community Affairs Manager for an international telecoms group with a presence around the globe, Mr. Wilson is extremely naïve to believe that posting such comments on a prominent website would not invoke a hostile response.

Having considered the facts, Mr. Wilson must be dismissed by his employer for the following reasons:

(1) Whilst we should all uphold freedom of speech, that freedom must be exercised responsibly. Following the official definition of racism, Mr. Wilson’s comments can clearly be defined as racist. They may also be an incitement to racial hatred. As such, there may be grounds for a criminal prosecution.

(2) His comments may be regarded as offensive to a variety of communities including followers of Islam, Palestinians, South Africans and Roman Catholics. As such, in addition to being considered racist in the former (presumably a breach of his terms of employment), he will be unable to effectively carry out his duties in fostering good relations with such groups, thus further breaching his terms of employment.

(3) His comments may be regarded as offensive to other groups such as teachers, social workers, employees of NGO’s, those who would describe themselves as socialists and so forth. Indeed his views are not exclusively offensive to these groups, and may be considered offensive to all those who espouse tolerance and respect – from all communities and all walks of life. This further enforces the breach of terms of employment raised above.

(4) The author appears to condone racism by asserting to be a racist is deemed as being “much worse than being violent, thoughtless or unkind” - placing him at odds with his employer and contract of employment.

(5) This is added to by his comments on hate crime.

(6) Wilson’s comments in relation to equality, diversity and gender issues will likewise be at odds with his employer and breach his contract of employment.

(7) Responsible, I read, for consultation with communities, Mr. Wilson describes same as “a formal system for ignoring public views while patronising them at the same time.” This statement places him at odds with his employer and his duties, thus again breaching his contract of employment.

(8) Comments relating to the BBC and media ensure relationships in this area are likewise compromised, thus breaching terms of employment.

The above, combined, ensure Mr. Wilson will be unable to continue to perform the duties of his role. By HIS actions, (many of which will counter his employers’ policies) HE ALONE has made himself unable to fulfil his role and thus contract of employment with Orange.

Remember, it was Mr. Wilson who indirectly referenced his employer by his introduction: “Inigo Wilson manages community affairs for a large telecoms company.” He also made comments in relation to both a colleague and a discussion within his organisation.

Again, whilst we all should seek to uphold freedom of expression, such expression must be exercised responsibly and within the legal framework of the UK. What is remarkable is that such a prominent and educated figure did not recognise the above, and how his comments would be interpreted by others (the key legal factor), regardless of the context in which they were intended.

It is also regrettable that because of his action, his employer, Orange, is now at the centre of a debate on which it has no desire to enter. Here Orange cannot win. Its actions will be no different to any other organisation caught in the same position – Vodafone, 02 or others. To think otherwise is foolhardy.

What is certain is that the reputation of his employer, its brand, customer relations and commercial activity will be damaged regardless of the outcome – further strengthening the requirement to dismiss Mr. Wilson.

Sadly the future looks bleak for not only Mr. Wilson, but for his employer, good community relations and all those who recognise greater understanding, mutual respect and humanity is the only future for our world.

There has lately been some rather silly talk about supposed BNP and UKIP "trolls" with the finger pointed (of course) at posters expressing "right wing" views in many cases not untypical of many party members.

In ract any such person intending to disrupt the forum is far more likely to post some nonsense which represents the opposite of his true views, and I would guess that the above post is a good example.

"I take it you've not got a lot of friends, Athena."

Maybe you can introduce me to all your vivacious and wacky Tory friends Sean and then my life would be complete.

"While I fully support this man's right to freedom of speech I wonder how much support he would be getting if he had been accused of anti-Semitism rather than Islamophobia.

I'm guessing some of his most fervent champions would have had rather less to say on the matter."

Actually John I'm sure these are the very people who would have whole-heartedly supported the publication of crude depictions of Jewish people so common in Nazi Germany. All in the name of 'free speech' you understand.

"A senior position within NuLab awaits you, I have no doubt"

Yeah because we all know how much New Labour hate Islamophobia and how they have had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the current hysteria whipped up towards Muslims, right? If we're being totally frank, while I have absolutely nothing in common with New Labour parasites, the same cannot be said for YOU.

"how they have had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the current hysteria whipped up towards Muslims, right?"

You shouldn't assume that everyone shares in your PC worldview. Maybe in the company you keep they buy into this sort of language, but I don't think many people here would agree that there is a national witchhunt in the government and media against Muslims.

In many ways, it is the exact opposite. Fear of political correctness has caused the government and the media to tread far too softly with extremist elements, and the likes of you are responsible for "whipping up" the sense of persecution that Muslims claim to feel.

Nevertheless, I don't think Muslims can genuinely feel that persecuted, since this whole Inigo Wilson fiasco proves that many of them know the power that Political Correctness gives them. How persecuted do they really feel when they know the rules of the game are bent in their favour?

"I don't think many people here would agree that there is a national witchhunt in the government and media against Muslims."

Well duh, of course people here wouldn't agree with that - Tories are not exactly renowned for their sensitivity or their ability to empathise with those being trampled all over, are they? How do you think this whole furore started in the first place?

I don't think that any reasonable people in the country as a whole would give any credence whatsoever to the idea of a witchhunt against Muslims.

Still, as always, people like you Athena just love to play that vistim card.

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker