Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

The immigration thread (LOCKED)

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 29 of 34 < 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 >

Topic Locked

Stirlingsays 16 Apr 19 7.03pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I think you are talking complete nonsense. No-where have I suggested that I even have a view on white people because I don't, anymore than I have a view on black people. No public figure can express views that don't exist! Not true because you stated an opinion of how people should feel over their race just a couple of posts ago. To quote you, you stated that: 'It is because of racist attitudes that "White and proud", as used by particular groups of white skinned people, has been tainted with sinister attributes.' This is you smearing white people who would say 'white and proud'......This smearing only exists because people like you do it. Yet for black people you stated: 'It is because of racism that "Black and proud" has grown as a means for people of colour to establish respect and gain dignity when in the past they were considered as lesser beings by those with white skins'. Hence you state that it's ok for one group and not ok with another based purely upon your definition of the past and what is and isn't valid. Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle All I have said is that the two claims need to be seen in context because context matters. Both could be racist, just as both might not be. All you are doing is suggesting that your idea of 'racism' is justified because of the 'context' that you personally believe in. Yet the 'context' of those that you don't agree with you ....well, that doesn't appear to matter. Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle It is though more understandable for those who have suffered exclusion and prejudice to try to raise their profile by reacting to that prejudice than it is for those from that part of the community who created that prejudice in the first place. Exactly the same would apply if, in a predominately black skinned country, white skinned people were previously marginalised. Historically though that doesn't seem to have happened does it? "White and proud", as used today, communicates a distasteful message, even if you cannot recognise it, whilst "British and proud" does not. There is nothing hypocritical involved in facing up to the truth. It's a double standard pure and simple. You spoke about black people being regarded as 'lesser beings' and here you refer to the 'exclusion' of people, yet this is precisely what you do when you demonise one set of people for having pride in their genetic heritage.....yet say it's alright for another. As for white people being 'previously marginalized', haven't you heard of 'white slavery'? Don't you know anything about the history of the middle east? Perhaps because certain groups don't practice victimisation as much as others you just don't know. 'White and Proud' is just as valid as 'Black and Proud' and anything saying otherwise is discriminating upon the basis of skin colour.....and by the very definition practicising that most terrible of crimes. Stupidity. Edited by Stirlingsays (16 Apr 2019 7.06pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

16 Apr 19 7.03pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Not true because you stated an opinion of how people should feel over their race just a couple of posts ago.

To quote you, you stated that:

'It is because of racist attitudes that "White and proud", as used by particular groups of white skinned people, has been tainted with sinister attributes.'

This is you smearing white people who would say 'white and proud'......This smearing only exists because people like you do it.

Yet for black people you stated:

'It is because of racism that "Black and proud" has grown as a means for people of colour to establish respect and gain dignity when in the past they were considered as lesser beings by those with white skins'.

Hence you state that it's ok for one group and not ok with another based purely upon your definition of the past and what is and isn't valid.

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

All I have said is that the two claims need to be seen in context because context matters. Both could be racist, just as both might not be.

All you are doing is suggesting that your idea of 'racism' is justified because of the 'context' that you personally believe in.

Yet the 'context' of those that you don't agree with you ....well, that doesn't appear to matter.

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

It is though more understandable for those who have suffered exclusion and prejudice to try to raise their profile by reacting to that prejudice than it is for those from that part of the community who created that prejudice in the first place. Exactly the same would apply if, in a predominately black skinned country, white skinned people were previously marginalised. Historically though that doesn't seem to have happened does it?

"White and proud", as used today, communicates a distasteful message, even if you cannot recognise it, whilst "British and proud" does not. There is nothing hypocritical involved in facing up to the truth.

It's a double standard pure and simple.

You spoke about black people being regarded as 'lesser beings' and here you refer to the 'exclusion' of people, yet this is precisely what you do when you demonise one set of people for having pride in their genetic heritage.....yet say it's alright for another.

As for white people being 'previously marginalized', haven't you heard of 'white slavery'? Don't you know anything about the history of the middle east? Perhaps because certain groups don't practice victimisation as much as others you just don't know.

'White and Proud' is just as valid as 'Black and Proud' and anything saying otherwise is discriminating upon the basis of skin colour.....and by the very definition practicising that most terrible of crimes.

Stupidity.

Edited by Stirlingsays (16 Apr 2019 7.06pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 16 Apr 19 7.10pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I think you are talking complete nonsense. No-where have I suggested that I even have a view on white people because I don't, anymore than I have a view on black people. No public figure can express views that don't exist! All I have said is that the two claims need to be seen in context because context matters. Both could be racist, just as both might not be. It is though more understandable for those who have suffered exclusion and prejudice to try to raise their profile by reacting to that prejudice than it is for those from that part of the community who created that prejudice in the first place. Exactly the same would apply if, in a predominately black skinned country, white skinned people were previously marginalised. Historically though that doesn't seem to have happened does it? "White and proud", as used today, communicates a distasteful message, even if you cannot recognise it, whilst "British and proud" does not. There is nothing hypocritical involved in facing up to the truth. Because of idiots from the extremes of politics. There is clearly no difference between White and Black pride. It is racist to believe otherwise. You can't justify penalising one demographic simply because at one brief time in history some of them exploited other people for profit who happened to be Black. Get off your narrow minded, self righteous high horse and consider how ridiculous that is in the grand scheme.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

16 Apr 19 7.10pm

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I think you are talking complete nonsense. No-where have I suggested that I even have a view on white people because I don't, anymore than I have a view on black people. No public figure can express views that don't exist! All I have said is that the two claims need to be seen in context because context matters. Both could be racist, just as both might not be. It is though more understandable for those who have suffered exclusion and prejudice to try to raise their profile by reacting to that prejudice than it is for those from that part of the community who created that prejudice in the first place. Exactly the same would apply if, in a predominately black skinned country, white skinned people were previously marginalised. Historically though that doesn't seem to have happened does it?

"White and proud", as used today, communicates a distasteful message, even if you cannot recognise it, whilst "British and proud" does not. There is nothing hypocritical involved in facing up to the truth.

Because of idiots from the extremes of politics.

There is clearly no difference between White and Black pride.

It is racist to believe otherwise.

You can't justify penalising one demographic simply because at one brief time in history some of them exploited other people for profit who happened to be Black.

Get off your narrow minded, self righteous high horse and consider how ridiculous that is in the grand scheme.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 16 Apr 19 8.01pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Not true because you stated an opinion of how people should feel over their race just a couple of posts ago. To quote you, you stated that: 'It is because of racist attitudes that "White and proud", as used by particular groups of white skinned people, has been tainted with sinister attributes.' This is you smearing white people who would say 'white and proud'......This smearing only exists because people like you do it. Yet for black people you stated: 'It is because of racism that "Black and proud" has grown as a means for people of colour to establish respect and gain dignity when in the past they were considered as lesser beings by those with white skins'. Hence you state that it's ok for one group and not ok with another based purely upon your definition of the past and what is and isn't valid. More nonsense. I have not attacked white people. I have noticed before that you try to put everything into neat square boxes but things are always more nuanced than that. Look again at my quote. Do you understand the difference between "particular groups of white skinned people" and white people in general? I am not "smearing white people"! I am criticising particular people who happen to have white skins. I go on to refer to the reason why, in my view, it is more understandable for people of colour to react to historical realities which even you cannot deny. That's not attacking white people. It is stating fact. It's a double standard pure and simple. You spoke about black people being regarded as 'lesser beings' and here you refer to the 'exclusion' of people, yet this is precisely what you do when you demonise one set of people for having pride in their genetic heritage.....yet say it's alright for another. As for white people being 'previously marginalized', haven't you heard of 'white slavery'? Don't you know anything about the history of the middle east? Perhaps because certain groups don't practice victimisation as much as others you just don't know. 'White and Proud' is just as valid as 'Black and Proud' and anything saying otherwise is discriminating upon the basis of skin colour.....and by the very definition practicising that most terrible of crimes. Stupidity. Edited by Stirlingsays (16 Apr 2019 7.06pm) The double standard exists only in your imagination. I have no problem at all in anyone having pride in their heritage. My criticism is the use of "white" to refer to it when more appropriate language would avoid the inferences which result from it's use. It's use seems a quite deliberate attempt to make a racist point which is designed to divide and not heal division. Of course I have heard of "white slavery" emanating in the middle east. I condemn any kind of slavery and would support any residual group seeking to establish their identity. It did not though happen here or to any of the groups under review. "White and Proud" is indeed as valid, and invalid, as "Black and Proud". It all depends on how, why, where and by whom it is used. In other words, on context and not just when placed in simplistic little square boxes. Edited by Wisbech Eagle (16 Apr 2019 8.04pm) For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 16 Apr 19 8.01pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Not true because you stated an opinion of how people should feel over their race just a couple of posts ago.

To quote you, you stated that:

'It is because of racist attitudes that "White and proud", as used by particular groups of white skinned people, has been tainted with sinister attributes.'

This is you smearing white people who would say 'white and proud'......This smearing only exists because people like you do it.

Yet for black people you stated:

'It is because of racism that "Black and proud" has grown as a means for people of colour to establish respect and gain dignity when in the past they were considered as lesser beings by those with white skins'.

Hence you state that it's ok for one group and not ok with another based purely upon your definition of the past and what is and isn't valid.

More nonsense. I have not attacked white people. I have noticed before that you try to put everything into neat square boxes but things are always more nuanced than that. Look again at my quote. Do you understand the difference between "particular groups of white skinned people" and white people in general? I am not "smearing white people"! I am criticising particular people who happen to have white skins. I go on to refer to the reason why, in my view, it is more understandable for people of colour to react to historical realities which even you cannot deny. That's not attacking white people. It is stating fact.

It's a double standard pure and simple.

Stupidity.

Edited by Stirlingsays (16 Apr 2019 7.06pm)

The double standard exists only in your imagination. I have no problem at all in anyone having pride in their heritage. My criticism is the use of "white" to refer to it when more appropriate language would avoid the inferences which result from it's use. It's use seems a quite deliberate attempt to make a racist point which is designed to divide and not heal division.

Of course I have heard of "white slavery" emanating in the middle east. I condemn any kind of slavery and would support any residual group seeking to establish their identity. It did not though happen here or to any of the groups under review.

"White and Proud" is indeed as valid, and invalid, as "Black and Proud". It all depends on how, why, where and by whom it is used. In other words, on context and not just when placed in simplistic little square boxes.

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (16 Apr 2019 8.04pm)

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 16 Apr 19 8.23pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle The double standard exists only in your imagination. I have no problem at all in anyone having pride in their heritage. My criticism is the use of "white" to refer to it when more appropriate language would avoid the inferences which result from it's use. It's use seems a quite deliberate attempt to make a racist point which is designed to divide and not heal division. The double standard exists in your very own words. You choose them, you wrote them. If you are going to state that use of a skin colour is inappropriate in some cases....I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you. However, I'm not going to attribute 'racist attitudes' to one skin colour, yet ascribe a positive intent for a different skin colour. You did. Indeed, you speak of healing divisions here, yet it was me who stated at the start that pride in your genetic heritage is fine. Sure, it's good that you recognise that this can all be perfectly valid. But it was you putting caveats in, not me......with the suspicion for one group but not the other. Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Of course I have heard of "white slavery" emanating in the middle east. I condemn any kind of slavery and would support any residual group seeking to establish their identity. It did not though happen here or to any of the groups under review. Well done, you condemn slavery. Are you arguing now that the location of where 'slavery' happened is important? How far down the genetic rabbit hole do you wish to go? Why is the location important unless you are making a 'genetic' connection and responsibility argument? Personally I don't sign up to the 'sins of the grandfathers' stuff......I don't do, 'born guilty'. I sign up to the various discussions on the importance of genes but certainly not a culturally mandated way to feel about it. Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle "White and Proud" is indeed as valid, and invalid, as "Black and Proud". It all depends on how, why, where and by whom it is used. In other words, on context and not just when placed in simplistic little square boxes. Edited by Wisbech Eagle (16 Apr 2019 8.04pm) I didn't give a context other than to demonstrate the double standard. I put the two statements out there to show how a certain demographic react differently to skin colour. You jumped in and proved my point. Edited by Stirlingsays (16 Apr 2019 8.29pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

16 Apr 19 8.23pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

The double standard exists only in your imagination. I have no problem at all in anyone having pride in their heritage. My criticism is the use of "white" to refer to it when more appropriate language would avoid the inferences which result from it's use. It's use seems a quite deliberate attempt to make a racist point which is designed to divide and not heal division.

The double standard exists in your very own words. You choose them, you wrote them.

If you are going to state that use of a skin colour is inappropriate in some cases....I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you. However, I'm not going to attribute 'racist attitudes' to one skin colour, yet ascribe a positive intent for a different skin colour.

You did.

Indeed, you speak of healing divisions here, yet it was me who stated at the start that pride in your genetic heritage is fine. Sure, it's good that you recognise that this can all be perfectly valid.

But it was you putting caveats in, not me......with the suspicion for one group but not the other.

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Well done, you condemn slavery. Are you arguing now that the location of where 'slavery' happened is important? How far down the genetic rabbit hole do you wish to go? Why is the location important unless you are making a 'genetic' connection and responsibility argument?

Personally I don't sign up to the 'sins of the grandfathers' stuff......I don't do, 'born guilty'.

I sign up to the various discussions on the importance of genes but certainly not a culturally mandated way to feel about it.

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (16 Apr 2019 8.04pm)

I didn't give a context other than to demonstrate the double standard.

I put the two statements out there to show how a certain demographic react differently to skin colour.

You jumped in and proved my point.

Edited by Stirlingsays (16 Apr 2019 8.29pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 16 Apr 19 8.36pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle More nonsense. I have not attacked white people. I have noticed before that you try to put everything into neat square boxes but things are always more nuanced than that. Look again at my quote. Do you understand the difference between "particular groups of white skinned people" and white people in general? I am not "smearing white people"! I am criticising particular people who happen to have white skins. I go on to refer to the reason why, in my view, it is more understandable for people of colour to react to historical realities which even you cannot deny. That's not attacking white people. It is stating fact. Edited by Wisbech Eagle (16 Apr 2019 8.04pm) Oh my god....this is pure gold. Can anyone balanced here imagine what the reaction would be if you changed the word white for black. Double standard city. You are plain as day defending your right to be anti white. Cool, own it. You have different standards for people depending upon their skin colour because of your perception of the importance of historical events for select demographics. You just can't seem to admit to yourself that you are defending anti white attitudes. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

16 Apr 19 8.36pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (16 Apr 2019 8.04pm)

Oh my god....this is pure gold.

Can anyone balanced here imagine what the reaction would be if you changed the word white for black.

Double standard city.

You are plain as day defending your right to be anti white. Cool, own it. You have different standards for people depending upon their skin colour because of your perception of the importance of historical events for select demographics.

You just can't seem to admit to yourself that you are defending anti white attitudes.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 16 Apr 19 8.58pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Oh my god....this is pure gold. Can anyone balanced here imagine what the reaction would be if you changed the word white for black. Double standard city. You are plain as day defending your right to be anti white. Cool, own it. You have different standards for people depending upon their skin colour because of your perception of the importance of historical events for select demographics. You just can't seem to admit to yourself that you are defending anti white attitudes. It is plainly a waste of time trying to reason with the completely unreasonable. If you cannot see by now that what I have said is not what you think I have said then you never will. You are an apologist for Trump and now you are an apologist for racism. That there is a relationship between those two attributes will, of course, escape you. I make no distinction between anyone's skin colour, or their sex, sexual orientation or anything else that is beyond their control. Or at least I strive to because some things we learned as kids are difficult to always eliminate. At least I try, whereas you appear blandly unaware of your own shortcomings. I will finish where I started. There is no equivalence between "White and proud" and "Black and proud" because those terms are used for different reasons and in different contexts. And that is a plain fact, obvious to all but those who will not see it. No more from me on this. I have better things to do. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 16 Apr 19 8.58pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Oh my god....this is pure gold.

Can anyone balanced here imagine what the reaction would be if you changed the word white for black.

Double standard city.

You just can't seem to admit to yourself that you are defending anti white attitudes.

It is plainly a waste of time trying to reason with the completely unreasonable. If you cannot see by now that what I have said is not what you think I have said then you never will.

You are an apologist for Trump and now you are an apologist for racism. That there is a relationship between those two attributes will, of course, escape you. I make no distinction between anyone's skin colour, or their sex, sexual orientation or anything else that is beyond their control. Or at least I strive to because some things we learned as kids are difficult to always eliminate. At least I try, whereas you appear blandly unaware of your own shortcomings.

I will finish where I started. There is no equivalence between "White and proud" and "Black and proud" because those terms are used for different reasons and in different contexts. And that is a plain fact, obvious to all but those who will not see it.

No more from me on this. I have better things to do.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 16 Apr 19 9.59pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle It is plainly a waste of time trying to reason with the completely unreasonable. If you cannot see by now that what I have said is not what you think I have said then you never will. You are an apologist for Trump and now you are an apologist for racism. That there is a relationship between those two attributes will, of course, escape you. I make no distinction between anyone's skin colour, or their sex, sexual orientation or anything else that is beyond their control. Or at least I strive to because some things we learned as kids are difficult to always eliminate. At least I try, whereas you appear blandly unaware of your own shortcomings. I will finish where I started. There is no equivalence between "White and proud" and "Black and proud" because those terms are used for different reasons and in different contexts. And that is a plain fact, obvious to all but those who will not see it. No more from me on this. I have better things to do. Only if you are indoctrinated by liberal White guilt. You are perpetuating a racist idea on that basis. If there is a better example of a double standard then I have yet to see it.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

16 Apr 19 9.59pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

It is plainly a waste of time trying to reason with the completely unreasonable. If you cannot see by now that what I have said is not what you think I have said then you never will.

I will finish where I started. There is no equivalence between "White and proud" and "Black and proud" because those terms are used for different reasons and in different contexts. And that is a plain fact, obvious to all but those who will not see it.

No more from me on this. I have better things to do.

Only if you are indoctrinated by liberal White guilt.

You are perpetuating a racist idea on that basis.

If there is a better example of a double standard then I have yet to see it.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 16 Apr 19 10.05pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle It is plainly a waste of time trying to reason with the completely unreasonable. If you cannot see by now that what I have said is not what you think I have said then you never will. You are an apologist for Trump and now you are an apologist for racism. That there is a relationship between those two attributes will, of course, escape you. I make no distinction between anyone's skin colour, or their sex, sexual orientation or anything else that is beyond their control. Or at least I strive to because some things we learned as kids are difficult to always eliminate. At least I try, whereas you appear blandly unaware of your own shortcomings. I will finish where I started. There is no equivalence between "White and proud" and "Black and proud" because those terms are used for different reasons and in different contexts. And that is a plain fact, obvious to all but those who will not see it. No more from me on this. I have better things to do. 'I make no distinction between anyone's skin colour' 'There is no equivalence between "White and proud" and "Black and proud because' Cognitive dissonance. Your own words defend anti white attitudes, that's all there is to it. Yep head off and apply your double standards to something else. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

16 Apr 19 10.05pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

It is plainly a waste of time trying to reason with the completely unreasonable. If you cannot see by now that what I have said is not what you think I have said then you never will.

I will finish where I started. There is no equivalence between "White and proud" and "Black and proud" because those terms are used for different reasons and in different contexts. And that is a plain fact, obvious to all but those who will not see it.

No more from me on this. I have better things to do.

'I make no distinction between anyone's skin colour'

'There is no equivalence between "White and proud" and "Black and proud because'

Cognitive dissonance.

Your own words defend anti white attitudes, that's all there is to it.

Yep head off and apply your double standards to something else.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 16 Apr 19 10.21pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays 'I make no distinction between anyone's skin colour' 'There is no equivalence between "White and proud" and "Black and proud because' Cognitive dissonance. Your own words defend anti white attitudes, that's all there is to it. Yep head off and apply your double standards to something else. It's quite astonishing how people of a reasonable level of intelligence can be so tainted by self loathing ideologies that they can reject even the mildest forms of racism against people of other skin colours and yet find blatant racism against people who share their colour quite justifiable based on a historical quirk of fate. It is similar to debating with very religious people. They believe in the scriptures and just ignore the blindingly obvious truth staring them in the face.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

16 Apr 19 10.21pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

'I make no distinction between anyone's skin colour'

'There is no equivalence between "White and proud" and "Black and proud because'

Cognitive dissonance.

Your own words defend anti white attitudes, that's all there is to it.

Yep head off and apply your double standards to something else.

It's quite astonishing how people of a reasonable level of intelligence can be so tainted by self loathing ideologies that they can reject even the mildest forms of racism against people of other skin colours and yet find blatant racism against people who share their colour quite justifiable based on a historical quirk of fate.

It is similar to debating with very religious people. They believe in the scriptures and just ignore the blindingly obvious truth staring them in the face.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 16 Apr 19 10.42pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger It's quite astonishing how people of a reasonable level of intelligence can be so tainted by self loathing ideologies that they can reject even the mildest forms of racism against people of other skin colours and yet find blatant racism against people who share their colour quite justifiable based on a historical quirk of fate. It is similar to debating with very religious people. They believe in the scriptures and just ignore the blindingly obvious truth staring them in the face. Yep, essentially they make a claim that they are against racism and then talk about 'context'. So essentially they are against all racism apart from the racism that they deem acceptable. Orwell summed it all up all those years ago with the 'all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.'...because....'back before you were born'....and so on and so forth. They don't like it when they are judged against their own standards. Edited by Stirlingsays (16 Apr 2019 10.43pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

16 Apr 19 10.42pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

It is similar to debating with very religious people. They believe in the scriptures and just ignore the blindingly obvious truth staring them in the face.

Yep, essentially they make a claim that they are against racism and then talk about 'context'. So essentially they are against all racism apart from the racism that they deem acceptable.

Orwell summed it all up all those years ago with the 'all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.'...because....'back before you were born'....and so on and so forth.

They don't like it when they are judged against their own standards.

Edited by Stirlingsays (16 Apr 2019 10.43pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Park Road 16 Apr 19 11.11pm
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle I wouldn't be proud because I have no interest whatsoever in that type of culture. However, so long as they don't interfere with the lives of others that's OK with me. Pitty, you might have learnt something about tolerance, acceptance and good music. They have already interfered with many lives being the UK's biggest ever export. There's hardly a country that doesn't have a skinhead sub culture whether the original one, or the nasty bonehead one. I have feeling you have never had an interest in any sub culture. Sub cultures are all nearly started by working class youth - something. I believe you were not Only a white middle/upper class snob would show no interest in such a amazing thing. Well as long as they didn't/don't interfere with your life that's ok Edited by Park Road (16 Apr 2019 11.12pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

Park Road

16 Apr 19 11.11pm

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I wouldn't be proud because I have no interest whatsoever in that type of culture. However, so long as they don't interfere with the lives of others that's OK with me.

Pitty, you might have learnt something about tolerance, acceptance and good music.

They have already interfered with many lives being the UK's biggest ever export.

There's hardly a country that doesn't have a skinhead sub culture whether the original one, or the nasty bonehead one.

I have feeling you have never had an interest in any sub culture. Sub cultures are all nearly started by working class youth - something. I believe you were not

Only a white middle/upper class snob would show no interest in such a amazing thing.

Well as long as they didn't/don't interfere with your life that's ok

Edited by Park Road (16 Apr 2019 11.12pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 16 Apr 19 11.23pm
I just missed the boots and Levis skinhead look but the sta prest , button down Ben, loafers outfit was good to wear. And the Tighten Up and Reggae Chartbusters records were great. Happy days.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

16 Apr 19 11.23pm

I just missed the boots and Levis skinhead look but the sta prest , button down Ben, loafers outfit was good to wear. And the Tighten Up and Reggae Chartbusters records were great. Happy days.

Alert a moderator to this post

Topic Locked

Page 29 of 34 < 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

The immigration thread (LOCKED)

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors