Kilroy quotes "the fifth amendment- a right to free speech".  TV presenter Robert Kilroy-Silk was fired after saying “some Arab states are barbaric and oppress women…..some cultural practises are not compatible with life in the UK”. Have we become so liberal and PC that to cause offence with difficult truths can cost a man his job? When appearing to be impartial means you can't repeat known facts if they aren’t palatable to the group concerned?

When expressing an opinion attracts, instead of a reasoned reply, a sharp response of insults and accusations, it becomes clear the opinion must contain some degree of fact. A person must say exactly what they mean when dealing with sensitive topics, and leave no room for miss-interpretation. This could be a deliberate misinterpretation or an interpretation influenced by personal experience effecting the feeling of what was inferred.

I wondered: Has this society developed a strange liberal overkill: perhaps those in minority groups are given extra leeway with immunity to criticism? Will relevant points now be left unsaid, for fearing of being accused of harbouring prejudices? Had Kilroy been a minority, would fewer people have taken offence, and would he have kept his job? Was he just saying what everyone was thinking? I put those thoughts on hold and deliberated some more.

His speech made very little effort in describing the problems and solutions to welcoming and integrating our new fellow citizens more effectively. To a person of a certain mindset listening; the undertone was a warning of barbaric oppressive immigrants and their practices; “Taliban: coming to a town near you”; a drumming up of fear and hate from those who think our “cultcha” of binge drinking and football violence is threatened by skilled migrant workers. Kilroy hadn’t properly qualified what he'd said, and should have realised that his words would be scrutinised, but perhaps this was the intention. I’d heard the words but missed his inferred meaning; making points relevant to certain distant regimes, in conjunction with local issues. The “facts” were true, but irrelevant and potentially misleading when grouped together.

This is what makes UKIP a most dangerous of parties, a Johnny-foreigner hating organisation masquerading behind a veil of ill-reasoned logic, semi-persuasive arguments which appear to be factual. Heck, even I was wondering why Kilroy was sacked when he hadn’t said anything technically wrong. He was looking like a badly dressed bond villain…a warning sign I should have paid attention to. It’s now abundantly clear those at the BBC did the right thing in sacking him, for it is our intentions that we should be judged upon, no matter how smart we are with our words.

Those who try to instil the idea that minorities receive a lot of positive discrimination give a clear indication that they’re on the loosing side; the one which would like you to use negative discrimination to redress the “balance”. A proper discussion of UK immigration and integration, with a look at cultural implications, is still required. Equally, we should examine our own culture and see what outdated habits aren’t compatible with our new 21^st century position; xenophobia, for example.

 Free speech banned? No- common sense prevailing.