slogger ?

[joe-90]

try telling my eldest boy that,he used to get bullied all the time because he looks different

In what way does he look different?

 

[daytona]

the colour of his skin

 

[joe-90]

Well considering that some schools have more blacks than whites - what colour is he?

 

[daytona]

it doesnt really matter what colour he is does it?
unless theres any stupid racists on here,even then it wont matter

his school is predominently white

 

[joe-90]

it doesnt really matter what colour he is does it?

No, that's what I said before. I bet he's ginger. You get a lot of racist remarks about ginger people.

 

[daytona]

good one joe

 

[Softus]

Who decided they were unacceptable?

You just did.

Someone who runs a forum that caters to the 'New Brits'? Hardly unbiased eh?

This isn't a catering web site, it's a DIY web site.

And if he never changed your views and made you hate foreigners - why do you assume he did so to others?

Why do you take the words "incite hatred" and interpret them as "made them hate"?

I observed that she incited racial hatred. I made no assumption.

If you think I made an assumption, please quote the words that Slogger used, the assumption that you think I made, and the words I posted that led you to believe that I'd made an assumption.

 

[joe-90]

You quote the words he used - and then substitute the word ginger or white.
I seem to recall that you've got a thing about 'travellers'. If you feel no hatred after reading a Slogger post - why do you erroneously believe that others will?

 

[Softus]

You quote the words he used - and then substitute the word ginger or white.

Asking me to quote her words, in response to me asking you to do it, isn't going to get us very far.

I seem to recall that you've got a thing about 'travellers'.

No; that was you attempting to wind me up.

However, as an update to that, I'm not very pleased with a specific ***** called "Moikle Smit" who attempted to raid my garden the other day.

If you choose to interpret that as meaning "Softus hates all travellers", when that clearly is the opposite of what I've repeatedly written, then that's a matter for you.

If you feel no hatred after reading a Slogger post - why do you erroneously believe that others will?

I've observed that Slogger's posts were habitually accompanied by two reactions: (1) Agreement expressed by other racists; (2) Moral outrage at those views being peddled on an open forum.

There's nothing erroneous about that observation, and you won't succeed in goading me into an argument simply by ignoring the meaning of the word "incite" and pretending that my post about Slogger meant something else.

It didn't. Slogger incited, and in a particular unpleasant way, which is why she was banned.

 

[daytona]

well for what my opinion is worth,i hate racists with a passion.
i think they are stupid,shortsighted,ignorant,cruel,unkind and they ruin peoples lives
and i think if they took the time to understand other cultures they would realise that we are not so different really.

oh no hang on does that opinion make me racist towards racists?

 

[joe-90]

The bottom line is: If that his posts didn't incite hatred in you - then by that very token they won't incite hatred in others, will they?

Ergo - his posts did not incite racial hatred.

 

[joe-90]

well for what my opinion is worth,i hate racists with a passion.
i think they are stupid,shortsighted,ignorant,cruel,unkind and they ruin peoples lives
and i think if they took the time to understand other cultures they would realise that we are not so different really.

oh no hang on does that opinion make me racist towards racists?

So you are suggesting that the UK opens its borders to all and sundry from wherever in the World? If not - why are certain races refused admission? Because they are the 'wrong race'?

 

[Softus]

The bottom line is: If that his posts didn't incite hatred in you - then by that very token they won't incite hatred in others, will they? Ergo - his posts did not incite racial hatred.

I've observed that people adopt the "bottom line is..." or "at the end of the day..." approaches when faced with reasoned points for which they have no answer.

Your postulate, i.e. the one whereby that you can prove lack of incitement on the grounds that I say I'm personally not influenced, is a non-sequitur. Some people might go so far as to call it utter nonsense, but that would be unkind.

Incitement is something that can be measured by the risk of an effect, i.e. without reference to an actual effect. For example, the intention to incite is as important as the efficacy of the act.

If you really, REALLY, want to believe that Slogger's views were reasonable and rational, then please go ahead and believe it.

I choose to believe that she was/is an out-of-control, aggressive, sometimes violent, bigoted, racist. And I feel that her banning is not entirely unrelated to that behaviour.

 

[joe-90]

Believe what you like. In all the years I have been on this forum I have yet to see anyone change their stance on any issue, therefore an incitement to racial hatred is nothing more than a clarion call for the already converted.
Substitute any racist statement that contains the word black for ginger and see what nonsense the race card really is.

 

[crockett]

Whatever...... who cares ???
Enjoy your day of rest, enjoy the weather and chill out