Gaming2 mins ago
Lord Help Us. He's Off Again.
Answers
He was just boring before his K, now he's insufferable .
05:48 Wed 26th Aug 2015
sp1814
/// But I'm sure in principle you agree that Lenny should be allowed to speak his mind on race issues. ///
Speaking one's mind and implementing direct discrimination, is I am sure you will agree are two different things?
No the difference between myself and Lenny Henry, is the fact that unlike him and others like him, I am not a supporter or even in a position to support and put into practice positive race discrimination.
http://
/// But I'm sure in principle you agree that Lenny should be allowed to speak his mind on race issues. ///
Speaking one's mind and implementing direct discrimination, is I am sure you will agree are two different things?
No the difference between myself and Lenny Henry, is the fact that unlike him and others like him, I am not a supporter or even in a position to support and put into practice positive race discrimination.
http://
andy-hughes
/// Nor those who leave for a foreign country, and then wish to return. ///
Twisting words again so as to suit your own particular agenda.
This woman (and I presume you are referring to that Muslim woman who left this country to join her ISIS husband) was not your usual holiday seeking tourist.
She was joining her terrorist husband and joining in with ISIS an enemy of the UK.
/// Nor those who leave for a foreign country, and then wish to return. ///
Twisting words again so as to suit your own particular agenda.
This woman (and I presume you are referring to that Muslim woman who left this country to join her ISIS husband) was not your usual holiday seeking tourist.
She was joining her terrorist husband and joining in with ISIS an enemy of the UK.
AOG - "No the difference between myself and Lenny Henry, is the fact that unlike him and others like him, I am not a supporter or even in a position to support and put into practice positive race discrimination."
No, the difference is, he has experienced predjudice and racial abuse up close and personal, you have not.
Because the important distinction here is that he is black, and you are white, so only one of you can argue from a perspective of personal experience.
No, the difference is, he has experienced predjudice and racial abuse up close and personal, you have not.
Because the important distinction here is that he is black, and you are white, so only one of you can argue from a perspective of personal experience.
AOG - "/// Nor those who leave for a foreign country, and then wish to return. ///
Twisting words again so as to suit your own particular agenda.
This woman (and I presume you are referring to that Muslim woman who left this country to join her ISIS husband) was not your usual holiday seeking tourist.
She was joining her terrorist husband and joining in with ISIS an enemy of the UK."
I am not 'twisting words' - the subject I am raising is the concept of treachery - specifically, being labelled a traitor.
This woman may be an undesirable, she may have committed acts, but under the terms of the noun, she is not a 'traitor'.
Using this evocative expression inaccurately does not make that a fact - but it does make it that, ironically, it is you who is twisting words to fit your argument.
Twisting words again so as to suit your own particular agenda.
This woman (and I presume you are referring to that Muslim woman who left this country to join her ISIS husband) was not your usual holiday seeking tourist.
She was joining her terrorist husband and joining in with ISIS an enemy of the UK."
I am not 'twisting words' - the subject I am raising is the concept of treachery - specifically, being labelled a traitor.
This woman may be an undesirable, she may have committed acts, but under the terms of the noun, she is not a 'traitor'.
Using this evocative expression inaccurately does not make that a fact - but it does make it that, ironically, it is you who is twisting words to fit your argument.
sp1814
/// And I'm sure none of these are true...in the same way that people who support a left wing ideology aren't necessarily traitors. ///
/// A word which you have sometimes alighted upon with a little too much enthusiasm. ///
Maybe, but not allied with those who support a left wing ideology.
I admit I have used the words Anti-British on occasions, but then so have the press and other ABers, against those on the Left who tend to support foreigners rather than their own people.
But if I am of the age that sometimes I may get a little forgetful, I would be obliged if you could furnish me with the proof that I have indeed called those who support a left wing ideology traitors.
If not, I would be obliged to you if you could apologise to me for accusing me falsely.
/// And I'm sure none of these are true...in the same way that people who support a left wing ideology aren't necessarily traitors. ///
/// A word which you have sometimes alighted upon with a little too much enthusiasm. ///
Maybe, but not allied with those who support a left wing ideology.
I admit I have used the words Anti-British on occasions, but then so have the press and other ABers, against those on the Left who tend to support foreigners rather than their own people.
But if I am of the age that sometimes I may get a little forgetful, I would be obliged if you could furnish me with the proof that I have indeed called those who support a left wing ideology traitors.
If not, I would be obliged to you if you could apologise to me for accusing me falsely.
andy-hughes
/// No, the difference is, he has experienced predjudice and racial abuse up close and personal, you have not. ///
Oh so you know that for certain do you, is that is why he has gained the height of a show business celebrity and has even been given a knighthood?
None of these things that myself as your ordinary white bloke has achieved.
/// Because the important distinction here is that he is black, and you are white, so only one of you can argue from a perspective of personal experience. ///
And why does the black person only have the benefit of that right?
In your generous support of Mr Henry you have failed to address his positive race discrimination attitude, or are you (just like him), being rather hypocritical.
/// No, the difference is, he has experienced predjudice and racial abuse up close and personal, you have not. ///
Oh so you know that for certain do you, is that is why he has gained the height of a show business celebrity and has even been given a knighthood?
None of these things that myself as your ordinary white bloke has achieved.
/// Because the important distinction here is that he is black, and you are white, so only one of you can argue from a perspective of personal experience. ///
And why does the black person only have the benefit of that right?
In your generous support of Mr Henry you have failed to address his positive race discrimination attitude, or are you (just like him), being rather hypocritical.
andy-hughes
/// Using this evocative expression inaccurately does not make that a fact - but it does make it that, ironically, it is you who is twisting words to fit your argument. ///
In this particular case and to be verbally correct traitor is not the word to use, to describe this woman, but it is the word most use in such circumstances.
How often do you hear the word murderous scum to describe a group who have not even committed a murder? Or even a *** towards a person, even though they have not been born out of wedlock?
/// Using this evocative expression inaccurately does not make that a fact - but it does make it that, ironically, it is you who is twisting words to fit your argument. ///
In this particular case and to be verbally correct traitor is not the word to use, to describe this woman, but it is the word most use in such circumstances.
How often do you hear the word murderous scum to describe a group who have not even committed a murder? Or even a *** towards a person, even though they have not been born out of wedlock?
AOG - "andy-hughes
"/// No, the difference is, he has experienced predjudice and racial abuse up close and personal, you have not. ///
Oh so you know that for certain do you, is that is why he has gained the height of a show business celebrity and has even been given a knighthood?"
I am delighted to land from a great height on your usual huffing and puffing 'Oh so ...' preamble because yes, I do know that for certain. I have interviewed Mr Henry on a number of occasions, and we have discussed is personal experience of racism in depth. In his view, and I have no reason to think he was not being truthful - if you grow up as a black man in urban Birmingham, you will experience racism first hand - and he has, many times.
As to whether that is 'the reason he has received a knighthood' - that is unworthy of you, since it is a matter of record that his knighthood has been awarded for services to charity.
"None of these things that myself as your ordinary white bloke has achieved."
Nor I - but I accept that, without bitterness - maybe you should do the same.
"/// Because the important distinction here is that he is black, and you are white, so only one of you can argue from a perspective of personal experience. ///
And why does the black person only have the benefit of that right?"
I have not said, or suggested that the black person only has the benefit of that right - that is an example of you twisting words, or more accurately, reaching a conclusion that is not offered - which is worse in my view.
Predjudice affects all people of all races, for all sorts of reason - only you have a bee in your bonnet about people of colour.
"In your generous support of Mr Henry you have failed to address his positive race discrimination attitude, or are you (just like him), being rather hypocritical."
I have not 'failed to address his PRD attitude' - it has simply not arisen in the points that I am making.
However, I am delighted to address it now - I think 'positive discrimination' is undesirable and should be avoided whenever possible. People of colour should obtain any and all roles in the media, arts, or business words, because they are the right person for the job, not because they have what is perceived as the right colour of skin.
"/// No, the difference is, he has experienced predjudice and racial abuse up close and personal, you have not. ///
Oh so you know that for certain do you, is that is why he has gained the height of a show business celebrity and has even been given a knighthood?"
I am delighted to land from a great height on your usual huffing and puffing 'Oh so ...' preamble because yes, I do know that for certain. I have interviewed Mr Henry on a number of occasions, and we have discussed is personal experience of racism in depth. In his view, and I have no reason to think he was not being truthful - if you grow up as a black man in urban Birmingham, you will experience racism first hand - and he has, many times.
As to whether that is 'the reason he has received a knighthood' - that is unworthy of you, since it is a matter of record that his knighthood has been awarded for services to charity.
"None of these things that myself as your ordinary white bloke has achieved."
Nor I - but I accept that, without bitterness - maybe you should do the same.
"/// Because the important distinction here is that he is black, and you are white, so only one of you can argue from a perspective of personal experience. ///
And why does the black person only have the benefit of that right?"
I have not said, or suggested that the black person only has the benefit of that right - that is an example of you twisting words, or more accurately, reaching a conclusion that is not offered - which is worse in my view.
Predjudice affects all people of all races, for all sorts of reason - only you have a bee in your bonnet about people of colour.
"In your generous support of Mr Henry you have failed to address his positive race discrimination attitude, or are you (just like him), being rather hypocritical."
I have not 'failed to address his PRD attitude' - it has simply not arisen in the points that I am making.
However, I am delighted to address it now - I think 'positive discrimination' is undesirable and should be avoided whenever possible. People of colour should obtain any and all roles in the media, arts, or business words, because they are the right person for the job, not because they have what is perceived as the right colour of skin.
Talbot - "I have told what I think. You seem to think differently and yet won't say."
I think that the fact that I have picked up Mr Pedant's post indicates that I require some clarification - and I have asked for it, and am still waiting.
Which is fine - he is under no obligation to answer - but I think my question makes my view perfectly clear.
I think that the fact that I have picked up Mr Pedant's post indicates that I require some clarification - and I have asked for it, and am still waiting.
Which is fine - he is under no obligation to answer - but I think my question makes my view perfectly clear.
AOG - "andy-hughes
/// Using this evocative expression inaccurately does not make that a fact - but it does make it that, ironically, it is you who is twisting words to fit your argument. ///
In this particular case and to be verbally correct traitor is not the word to use, to describe this woman, but it is the word most use in such circumstances."
No - it's the word that you use, because you like to use evocative language, even if it is incorrectly, because you like the connotation involved - that this woman is utterly undeserving of any consideration, help, or support, to say nothing od her innocent children - because you have (pardon the pun) a black-and-white attitude to issues where people of other ethnicitries are involved, and your history on this site is ample evidence of that.
" How often do you hear the word murderous scum to describe a group who have not even committed a murder? Or even a *** towards a person, even though they have not been born out of wedlock?"
Agreed - but adding evidence of misuse of language simply indicates that it is widespread - it doesn't make it right.
/// Using this evocative expression inaccurately does not make that a fact - but it does make it that, ironically, it is you who is twisting words to fit your argument. ///
In this particular case and to be verbally correct traitor is not the word to use, to describe this woman, but it is the word most use in such circumstances."
No - it's the word that you use, because you like to use evocative language, even if it is incorrectly, because you like the connotation involved - that this woman is utterly undeserving of any consideration, help, or support, to say nothing od her innocent children - because you have (pardon the pun) a black-and-white attitude to issues where people of other ethnicitries are involved, and your history on this site is ample evidence of that.
" How often do you hear the word murderous scum to describe a group who have not even committed a murder? Or even a *** towards a person, even though they have not been born out of wedlock?"
Agreed - but adding evidence of misuse of language simply indicates that it is widespread - it doesn't make it right.
Talbot - "But yet you won't clarify? "
My question was to Peter Pedant.
If he posts that he is having difficulty in understanding it, I will be delighted to expand my meaning for his benefit - but since it is a one-line question, asking who 'they / them' - delete as you feel appropriate if you are a language expert - are?
I don't know if I can simplify it much more than that - hopefully he won't struggle in the way that you and AOG seem to be doing.
My question was to Peter Pedant.
If he posts that he is having difficulty in understanding it, I will be delighted to expand my meaning for his benefit - but since it is a one-line question, asking who 'they / them' - delete as you feel appropriate if you are a language expert - are?
I don't know if I can simplify it much more than that - hopefully he won't struggle in the way that you and AOG seem to be doing.
-- answer removed --
AOG - "Talbot-
/// I have told what I think. You seem to think differently and yet won't say. ///
Me and you both Talbot, but I don't think he will be happy until he gets the very same answer from PP.
What does he hope to achieve? "
I hope to achieve a response from PP, since only he knows what he meant in the sentence I am querying.
As to 'getting the very same answer from PP' - the reason why I am waiting for his answer is to avoid second-guessing what he thinks - not a good idea in any debate.
/// I have told what I think. You seem to think differently and yet won't say. ///
Me and you both Talbot, but I don't think he will be happy until he gets the very same answer from PP.
What does he hope to achieve? "
I hope to achieve a response from PP, since only he knows what he meant in the sentence I am querying.
As to 'getting the very same answer from PP' - the reason why I am waiting for his answer is to avoid second-guessing what he thinks - not a good idea in any debate.
