Jump to content

Recommended Posts

giggirl Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No, you didn't need to ask, you could have just

> let it slide. As it is, you're being

> self-righteous with someone you know nothing at

> all about. You don't know the lady or her partner

> or their lives, so let it go and don't ask her to

> explain herself to you. Give the benefit of the

> doubt. No wonder people don't post. These

> pointless digs are not only ugly but they're dull

> reading too.


Wow, you got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.


Actually, I think I'm more than entitled to ask. If someone posts a anecdote on a public website that obviously leads to such a question, then they should not be too surprised if it is asked.


So you can pop down off your high horse now, GG.

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mick Mac Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Personally Sue I think you should apologise for

> > saying the OP was racist.

>

> xxxxxx

>

> Eh? Where did I say the OP was racist?


Sue is, of course, correct. She definitely did not say the OP was racist. She might have suggested, hinted, indicated, offered, prompted, propounded, connoted and implied it. But Sue definitely did not say it.


(This post has be brought to you by thesaurus.com)

Countrlass22 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz i suggest you get out side bed right

> side..........side if kindess and no wasnt comment

> requesting suggestions of such rude judgmental

> behaviour and your way off thread topic.

>

> suggest read rules.refresh


Read my post again - I judged absolutely nothing.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Mick Mac Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Personally Sue I think you should apologise

> for

> > > saying the OP was racist.

> >

> > xxxxxx

> >

> > Eh? Where did I say the OP was racist?

>

> Sue is, of course, correct. She definitely did

> not say the OP was racist. She might have

> suggested, hinted, indicated, offered, prompted,

> propounded, connoted and implied it. But Sue

> definitely did not say it.

>

> (This post has be brought to you by thesaurus.com)


xxxxxxx


Christ almighty.


Have you actually bothered to read my post where I explained my objections to the OP's describing the person who scratched her car as an asylum seeker?


It's nothing to do with race - except perhaps in your mind, as perhaps you imagine that all asylum seekers must be a different race to you?


Jesus Christ. Do feel free to continue to deliberately misinterpret what I say. It keeps Jeremy amused, anyway :))

Yes Sue, I read your post, especially the bit where you said "I can't think such statements can be doing your "French fashion consultant" business (or whatever it is) any favours, except amongst the more right wing readers of the forum".


What did you mean by that exactly?


And "you imagine that all asylum seekers must be a different race to you"? Well, kind of, as by definition they are not British. Ergo, they are a different nationality and therefore covered by the Race Relations Act, which is why saying nasty things about the French or the Irish is, indeed, racist.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes Sue, I read your post, especially the bit

> where you said "I can't think such statements can

> be doing your "French fashion consultant" business

> (or whatever it is) any favours, except amongst

> the more right wing readers of the forum".

>

> What did you mean by that exactly?

>

> And "you imagine that all asylum seekers must be a

> different race to you"? Well, kind of, as by

> definition they are not British. Ergo, they are a

> different nationality and therefore covered by the

> Race Relations Act, which is why saying nasty

> things about the French or the Irish is, indeed,

> racist.



Xxxxxx


The Race Relations Act covers discrimination on the grounds of various things including both race AND nationality.


Race is not the same as nationality.


And since the posts leading up to mine have now been deleted, I have no intention of continuing any discussion out of the context of those posts.


If I think somebody is making racist comments I will say so outright, as I have on this forum in the past. If I had thought the OP was racist I would have said so. I didn't.


I am not posting any more on this thread. As far as I am concerned I have made my views quite clear so if anyone claims not to understand them, that's too bad.

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Race is not the same as nationality.


Technically and semantically correct, but in terms of day to day usage of the term 'racist', then no. Unless you somehow think that those old "No Irish" signs weren't at all racist?

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Race is not the same as nationality.

>

> Technically and semantically correct, but in terms

> of day to day usage of the term 'racist', then no.

> Unless you somehow think that those old "No Irish"

> signs weren't at all racist?


Xxxxx


As I have said, I am not continuing this discussion here.


If you want to go down this road, which has nothing to do with the OP which in any case has been deleted by the poster, then start a thread in the lounge.


Then you can argue about definitions all you like :)

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> If you want to go down this road, which has

> nothing to do with the OP which in any case has

> been deleted by the poster, then start a thread in

> the lounge.


Hang on, you were the one that derailed it from the OPs original point in the first place! You know - the bit where you sort-of-but-not-quite called her a racist...

withhout a doubt ,way out line this person did this that person said that reading into what isnt written arrogance,lack.of care to read replies ignorance is bliss to the offender not to the reciever.

no desire keep to thread topic blantant disreguard of forum rules.

pleasure seeing members leave so you can be feeling a passion.of "im right "your all doingthis or that.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sue Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > If you want to go down this road, which has

> > nothing to do with the OP which in any case has

> > been deleted by the poster, then start a thread

> in

> > the lounge.

>

> Hang on, you were the one that derailed it from

> the OPs original point in the first place! You

> know - the bit where you sort-of-but-not-quite

> called her a racist...


Xxxxxx


You appear to be just stirring.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • of course most people would avoid the "stupid" term - but I'm sticking with it fact is no other European would be so dumb, and even with the same information, the  same media, the same everything, 2 of the countries within the UK saw ho stupid an idea it was - but only the English (who played a large part in the Welsh result) pushed ahead - there is something defiantly arrogant and stupid and it isn't just down to bad info and bad leadership But that was all 2016 - it's people in 2025 who claim it to be a good idea executed badly who are especially stupid Now - does calling people stupid help anyone? It's not especially politically gainful and just gets peoples' backs up - but it remains a truth and only when the country as a whole genuinely holds it's hands up and admits the stupidity (rather than downplaying it as a poor decision - no shade meant Mal - you are just nicer and politer than me) will it begin. to turn the tide Also worth mentioning that yes I am as intractable and blunt with friends and family who voted Leave as well - this isn't me hiding behind some online anonymous account. This is what I'm like
    • Hello My name is Lizzie and I work locally as a dog walker and nanny. I won’t be needed over Summer so will have full availability for a dogsitting job. I have a DBS certificate and will provide several dogsitting references as well. Please note that I can only watch your pet at your home since they are sadly not allowed in my flat! Looking forward to hear from you
    • The decision to leave the EU was a poor one, but I'd avoid the term stupid when applied to the masses (the decision was of course stupid) and blame those who willingly misled.  A certain N Farage (pronounced with a hard G rather than the soft G he affected, rather continental eh?) being one of the main culprits. He blames the Tories for not delivering Brexit, and not really clear how Labour are playing this.  But ultimately what sort of Brexit were people voting for?  And ditto what future were people voting for last Thursday?
    • "That’s very insulting! You are basically calling 17 million people that voted to leave the EU ‘thick’. " I'm certainly calling them wrong. And many of those 17 million agree with me now and have expressed regret. Many others were indeed thick, and remain so. You can see them being interviewed all the time. As for insulting, the losing side in that referendum have being called every name under the sun "enemies of the people" etc etc - so spare me the tears about being insulted But for clarity. there is a certain type of individual who even now thinks Brexit was a good idea, tends to side with Trump and holds views about immigrants - and yes I am happy to calll those people thick. - and even worse Jazzer posts a long and sometimes correct post about the failings of modern parties. I myself think labour are woefully underperforming. But equally it has been less than a year after 14 years of mismanagement and despite some significant errors have largely steadied the ship. You only have to speak to other  countries to recognise the improvement there. They have cut NHS waiting times, and the upside of things like NI increases is higher minimum wage - something hard-bitten voters should appreciate. They were accused of being too gloomy when they came in and yet simultaneously people are accusing them of promising the earth and failing to deliver - both of those can't be true at the same time Fact is, this country repeatedly, over 15 years, voted for austerity and self-damaging policies like Brexit despite all warnings - this newish govt now have to pick up the pieces and there are no easy solutions. Voters say "we just want honest politicians" - ok, we have some bad news about the economy and the next few years  - "no no not that kind of honesty!!! - magic some solutions up now!" Anyone who considers voting for Reform because they don't represent existing parties and want "change" is being criminally negligent in ignoring their dog-whistles, their lack of diligence in vetting, their lack of attendance (in Westminster now and in eu parties is guises past) and basically making all of the same mistakes when they pushed for Brexit - basically, not serious people   "cost of things in the shops and utility bills keep on rising, the direct opposite of what they promised." - can we see that promise? I don't recall it? Because whatever voters or govts want, the cost of things is not exactly entirely in their gift. People were warned prices would rise with Brexit and e were told "we don't care - it's a price worth paying!". Turns out that isn' really true now is it - people DO care about the cost of things (and of course there are other factors - covid, trump, tariffs, wars etc.    What the country needs is a serious, mature electorate who take a high level view of priorities and get behind the hard work needed to achieve that. There is zero chance of that happening so we are doomed to repeat failures for years to come, complaining about everything and voting for policies which will make things worse here we have labour 2024 energy manifesto commitments - all of it necessary long term investment - calling for immediate price cuts with no money in the kitty seems unrealistic given all of the economic headwinds   https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/general-election-2024-all-manifesto-energy-pledges/#Labour_Party
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...