FreeMason Protestor - Parliament Sq

notsoblue

spen666 wrote:

Firstly, I'm glad you've seen my photo. I presume though you have neither seen my ancestors, not the photos and historical records I have of them. Doubt it all you like. PM me and arrange to come to visit my home and I'll prove you scepticism misplaiced. Hoipefully then you will be big enough to admit to those on here what I posted is correct about my ancestory

If you think your ancestry is relevant here then you've missed the point

spen666 wrote:

Secondly, the BNP are a legitimate political party.....blablahblahblahbla.....

This thread is going nowhere :P

DonDaddyD

Shit just got real.

Coriander wrote:

And doubtless Spen will apologise later to you that he is evidently not black enough looking for you, but to question what he has just written about his own ancestry because you have decided (as you almost explictily state) it can't be so is much more offensive than anything he may have said earlier in this thread.

And for someone so keen on correct terminology, I'd have thought you'd realise that an Afro is a hairstyle, but people with either or both African and Carribean hertiage are African-Carribean.

DDD - please will you start to act your age and learn that it is both permissible and acceptable for people to hold different views from you.

Firstly, Corrie, while I respect you don't patronise me by asking me to act my age. I don't and have never shown you that level of disrespect. Secondly, I think I do accept that other people hold different views. What I am is bold enough to challenge and ask why they have a different view, understanding that is how in my opinion people learn and grow. There does, however, come a point when that different view is offensive or simply wrong and needs to be called out as such.

The BNP weren't a legal or legitmate party, they've since had to change their member policies to actually include ethnic minorities.

You seem to have missed the overarching point of my post while trapping yourself within a claim that Spen isn't black enough. Firstly he isn't black but that is beside the point. The point is that THIS BLACK MAN finds the word coloured to be offensive.

Afro-carribbean or African-Carribbean are both acceptable.

spen666

Porgy wrote:

But the BNP do incite violence. Always have done. It is a major injustice that they still exist as a legal party.

Really? What page of their manifesto was that in?

If the BNP do incite violence why has the BNP never been charged with any offence or banned?

Sadly, the reality is that the BNP are far too clever in its statements and publications to have ever espoused violence.

Plenty of people bandy round cheap insults like you do, but no one can ever back them up with any evidence

spen666

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Firstly, I'm glad you've seen my photo. I presume though you have neither seen my ancestors, not the photos and historical records I have of them. Doubt it all you like. PM me and arrange to come to visit my home and I'll prove you scepticism misplaiced. Hoipefully then you will be big enough to admit to those on here what I posted is correct about my ancestory

If you think your ancestry is relevant here then you've missed the point
...

Well then you've just blown away all of DDDs protest and those of others who cite the struggle of their ancestors as the reason they clim the word is offensive.

Or is this another PC type argument that ancestory is only relevant for some and not others.

now what was it George Orwell said in Animal Farm about everyone being equal.....


Strange you don't take DDD and others to task over their ancestory which was quoted long before i mentioned mine. Now, why is that?

spen666

DonDaddyD wrote:

....

The BNP weren't a legal or legitmate party, they've since had to change their member policies to actually include ethnic minorities.

Erm DDD- answer the point about how the BNP are able to exist and field candidates at elections, have local councillors and MEPs if they are not legitimate.

Alternatively, you could just admit you are wrong on this point

You seem to have missed the overarching point of my post while trapping yourself within a claim that Spen isn't black enough. Firstly he isn't black but that is beside the point. The point is that THIS BLACK MAN finds the word coloured to be offensive.

Afro-carribbean or African-Carribbean are both acceptable.

Stop trying to bully people into using your approved words. If you find it offensive, that is your problem. There was absolutely no offense meant in the use of the word. You are finding offensde where there is none intended. The term was used as a DESCRIPTOR to help identify the protestor in question

DonDaddyD

spen666 wrote:

Sadly DDD , your narrow minded prejudice shows through here

Ironically this is largely a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Firstly, I'm glad you've seen my photo. I presume though you have neither seen my ancestors, not the photos and historical records I have of them. Doubt it all you like. PM me and arrange to come to visit my home and I'll prove you scepticism misplaiced. Hoipefully then you will be big enough to admit to those on here what I posted is correct about my ancestory

Spen, it is entirely genetically possible for your ancestors on both sides of your family (at the same time) to be a different ethnicity from what you are now. I have white ancestors, I'm sure. That isn't my problem.

My problem is your use of said ancestors to justify your use of the word coloured. It holds no relevance.

Just because you have black anscestors doesn't mean you suddenly understand what it means to be refered to as coloured.

That was my point.

Secondly, the BNP are a legitimate political party.

Well they weren't (past tense) as they had to change their policies to allow ethnic minorities into their party.... but that's for a different thread.

As for intolerance, it seems that I'm espousing freedom for people to express non violent views wherwas you are not prepared to tolerate those people being able to express their views. Sadly DDD you are a hippocrit and the intolerant one. You are trying to control what people can say

No Spen, my intolerance is when said views cause offense and a lack of willingness to understand why the word causes offense.

DonDaddyD

spen666 wrote:

Stop trying to bully people into using your approved words. If you find it offensive, that is your problem.

Well that's bullsh*t, if I called you a fat c*nt and you took offence would that be your problem and I could just keep on saying it?

How about if I was to refer to people with racial abuse, or use words known to cause offensive. I guess its fine I said those things, because it was their problem.

There was absolutely no offense meant in the use of the word.

Fine, my issue is (now) that you are trying to tell me that the word is not offensive when I (personally) know it to be.

Now I've accepted your point [your use of the word was not meant to be offesive]. Lets see if you can accept my point [That the word is considered personally offensive to some].

spen666

DonDaddyD wrote:

....

Secondly, the BNP are a legitimate political party.

Well they weren't as they had to change their policies to allow ethnic minorities into their party.... but that's for a different thread.

Ermm the BNP WERE and always have been a legitimate party. At no time has the BNP not been a legitimate party.

They had to change a clause in their constitution. That clause did not render the perty illegitimate.

At no time were the BNP not legitimate. Its a bit like saying because the Supreme Court rule against the police/ prosecution on one legal poiint then the whole of the criminal system is illegitimate- clearly nonesense

As for intolerance, it seems that I'm espousing freedom for people to express non violent views wherwas you are not prepared to tolerate those people being able to express their views. Sadly DDD you are a hippocrit and the intolerant one. You are trying to control what people can say

No Spen, my intolerance is when said views cause offense and a lack of willingness to understand why the word causes offense.

Yes, YOUR INTOLERANCE. You are admitting it now, you are being intolerant.

I do understand why you find the word offensive. I have never suggested I do not understand why you find it offensive.

The fact that I do not support your view that the word is offensive is completely different from a lack of willingness to understand why the word causes offense.

You seem to be suggesting that anyone who does not agree with you is "showing a lack of willingness to unsderstand...". No, I am showing a lack of willingness to agree that the word used without any intention to be offensive is offensive and should not be used as you do not approve.

As Corriander says, accept that people have differing views.

spen666

DonDaddyD wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Stop trying to bully people into using your approved words. If you find it offensive, that is your problem.

Well that's bullsh*t, if I called you a fat c*nt and you took offence would that be your problem and I could just keep on saying it?

How about if I was to refer to people with racial abuse, or use words known to cause offensive. I guess its fine I said those things, because it was their problem.

There was absolutely no offense meant in the use of the word.

Fine, my issue is (now) that you are trying to tell me that the word is not offensive when I (personally) know it to be.

Now I've accepted your point [your use of the word was not meant to be offesive]. Lets see if you can accept my point [That the word is considered personally offensive to some].

Lets take your logic to the extreme shal;l we. if I can't used words because you find them offensive even though there was no offense intended. By that logic, if I say that I find anything you post offensive does that mean you should not be allowed to post anything at all?


As for your example in the opening line, there is a difference between saying something intending it to be offensive and saying something not intending it to be offensive. If you say something intending it to be offensive, then the context and meaning is different.

i've had plenty of people call me that and I use it about myself at times. There is no offense intended and non taken in those circumstances

Porgy

spen666 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

But the BNP do incite violence. Always have done. It is a major injustice that they still exist as a legal party.

Really? What page of their manifesto was that in?

you are naive as well as stupid?

If the BNP do incite violence why has the BNP never been charged with any offence or banned?

I have no idea - racist police?

Sadly, the reality is that the BNP are far too clever in its statements and publications to have ever espoused violence.

Did you see Griffin on Question Time - he's not clever

Plenty of people bandy round cheap insults like you do, but no one can ever back them up with any evidence

Really? I have seen the BNP in action - in Woolwich and Plumstead. I have been beaten up by BNP thugs myself for daring to stand up as a socialist.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 53351.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/06/453867.html

Try trawling through this lot - I can't access many of them due to being at work
http://www.google.co.uk/search?rls=ig&h ... =&gs_rfai=

Don;t tell me there's no evidence - you are an apologist for racists now - how much lower can you sink?

Porgy

spen666 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

....

The BNP weren't a legal or legitmate party, they've since had to change their member policies to actually include ethnic minorities.

Erm DDD- answer the point about how the BNP are able to exist and field candidates at elections, have local councillors and MEPs if they are not legitimate.

Alternatively, you could just admit you are wrong on this point

You seem to have missed the overarching point of my post while trapping yourself within a claim that Spen isn't black enough. Firstly he isn't black but that is beside the point. The point is that THIS BLACK MAN finds the word coloured to be offensive.

Afro-carribbean or African-Carribbean are both acceptable.

Stop trying to bully people into using your approved words. If you find it offensive, that is your problem. There was absolutely no offense meant in the use of the word. You are finding offensde where there is none intended. The term was used as a DESCRIPTOR to help identify the protestor in question

Why didn't you call that guy a nigger?

woodford2barbican

BNP are a legitimate political party.

rjsterry

spen666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

True, you might come across a black person who has no problem whatsoever with outdated terms like 'coloured', but it is potentially offensive (quite likely, I'd say), for the reasons already described, so best to avoid it. It's not as though there isn't a sensible alternative.

FFS No body had better ever say anything then as somebosdy MAY find offense in it.

The people finding offense where non was meant are the ones who need to look at themselves instead of trying to bully people into using the current PC words.



Incidentally in the 1980s when I was involved in writing a number of articles for newspapers to do with racism in football, the term "black" was not allowed to be used in the articles as it was considered offensive, and had to be replaced by the term "coloured". Now the PC brigade have decided it time to control people again by changing it back.

I still have the original drafts of the article and the instructions from the Race Relations Board to change the term to coloured!!!!!

It's pretty common knowledge that 'coloured' is now considered offensive and that the generally accepted description is black. Are you seriously suggesting that you weren't aware of this Spen? The meaning of words evolves over time; the word negro was once considered perfectly acceptable, but hasn't been for some time, and is pretty unequivocally regarded as a derogatory term now. Who exactly are this mythical PC brigade anyway?

mcj78

Spen666 - you used a term that DDD finds offensive & I can see why some people would - you can't tell people what is offensive to them, it's entirely his perogative to choose whether or not he is offended by such a term - arguing that it's not an offensive term as it was acceptable to use in the '80s doesn't really wash i'm afraid. Times change, the 80's were 30 years ago & i'd like to think the country has come on leaps & bounds in terms of racial fairness since then.

Last year my footy team went up to the very north of Scotland for a friendly & some shennanigans for the weekend - my Tanzanian mate was a hit with the whole town including a friendly (yet blazing drunk) old guy who demanded to buy him a pint and get his life story as he couldn't remember the last time there had "been a darkie" in the town... hardly the most PC of language but he genuinely never contemplated causing offence by usuing (by modern terms) outdated language in describing someone's appearance. No offence was taken incidentally as my mate coouldn't understand a word he was saying, but someone at some point whispered in the old boy's ear that wasn't an acceptable "descrtiptor" any more, if it ever was & he was mortified at the thought of offending the new coolest guy in town.

So, by reasonable rationale if i'd inadvertently upset anyone by an unfortunate choice of words i'd simply appologise for any offence caused & move on with it, not try & justify the use of said term.

I myself am a pain in the arse & will admit that quite happily, others might strike you if you called them that & so on & so on.

Group hug?

J

Porgy

woodford2barbican wrote:

BNP are a legitimate political party.

I'd say they're legal - but not necessarily legitimate - see defintion 2.

le·git·i·mate (l-jt-mt)
adj.

1. Being in compliance with the law; lawful: a legitimate business.
2. Being in accordance with established or accepted patterns and standards: legitimate advertising practices.
3. Based on logical reasoning; reasonable: a legitimate solution to the problem.
4. Authentic; genuine: a legitimate complaint.
5. Born of legally married parents: legitimate issue.
6. Of, relating to, or ruling by hereditary right: a legitimate monarch.
7. Of or relating to drama of high professional quality that excludes burlesque, vaudeville, and some forms of musical comedy: the legitimate theater.

Porgy

Porgy wrote:

spen666 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

....

The BNP weren't a legal or legitmate party, they've since had to change their member policies to actually include ethnic minorities.

Erm DDD- answer the point about how the BNP are able to exist and field candidates at elections, have local councillors and MEPs if they are not legitimate.

Alternatively, you could just admit you are wrong on this point

You seem to have missed the overarching point of my post while trapping yourself within a claim that Spen isn't black enough. Firstly he isn't black but that is beside the point. The point is that THIS BLACK MAN finds the word coloured to be offensive.

Afro-carribbean or African-Carribbean are both acceptable.

Stop trying to bully people into using your approved words. If you find it offensive, that is your problem. There was absolutely no offense meant in the use of the word. You are finding offensde where there is none intended. The term was used as a DESCRIPTOR to help identify the protestor in question

Why didn't you call that guy a nigger?

spen - you should have called him a nigger - it's just a word and I can't see why it's remotely offensive - just derived from the Spanish / French words for black in a southern american dialect.

lost_in_thought

I didn't know 'coloured' was offensive now - it's a word I've always thought was the polite thing to say.

It's a minefield, like the right word for little person... is that the right word for that still? Or have we gone full circle on that too?

Silly, really. Also, I called someone ginger on here t'other day telling a story. Am I allowed to say that? Jon? Brun? Is that offensive?

Maybe we should ban adjectives altogether.

Or, alternatively, calm the heck down.

Jeez. (can I say that?)

Porgy

Well you live in the outback - spen has no such excuse being a Londoner - he should have known. even if he didn;t - once told he should have just accepted that it was offensive and apologised.

mcj78

Oh, knew i'd forgot something - F U C K THE BNP, bunch of thinly veilled racists masquerading as a legitimate political party does not in my mind constitute a "legitimate" political party.

lost_in_thought

Porgy wrote:

Well you live in the outback - spen has no such excuse being a Londoner - he should have known. even if he didn;t - once told he should have just accepted that it was offensive and apologised.

Well, I've worked in that London for ooooh 8 years now... and I still didn't know. Do you get updates from the politcal correctness police on what words are OK and not OK if you live in London?

My point was more that it's a bit daft to get so wound up about it. I'm sure he didn't mean to cause offence.

UndercoverElephant

rjsterry wrote:

Who exactly are this mythical PC brigade anyway?

You can get in tough with them by dialling 999.

spen666

mcj78 wrote:

Spen666 - you used a term that DDD finds offensive & I can see why some people would - you can't tell people what is offensive to them, it's entirely his perogative to choose whether or not he is offended by such a term - arguing that it's not an offensive term as it was acceptable to use in the '80s doesn't really wash i'm afraid. Times change, the 80's were 30 years ago & i'd like to think the country has come on leaps & bounds in terms of racial fairness since then.

Erm i've not tried to tell DDD what is offensive to him.

Why make up false accusations?

Last year my footy team went up to the very north of Scotland for a friendly & some shennanigans for the weekend - my Tanzanian mate was a hit with the whole town including a friendly (yet blazing drunk) old guy who demanded to buy him a pint and get his life story as he couldn't remember the last time there had "been a darkie" in the town... hardly the most PC of language but he genuinely never contemplated causing offence by usuing (by modern terms) outdated language in describing someone's appearance. No offence was taken incidentally as my mate coouldn't understand a word he was saying, but someone at some point whispered in the old boy's ear that wasn't an acceptable "descrtiptor" any more, if it ever was & he was mortified at the thought of offending the new coolest guy in town.

So, by reasonable rationale if i'd inadvertently upset anyone by an unfortunate choice of words i'd simply appologise for any offence caused & move on with it, not try & justify the use of said term.

I myself am a pain in the ars* & will admit that quite happily, others might strike you if you called them that & so on & so on.

Group hug?

J

Porgy

lost_in_thought wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Well you live in the outback - spen has no such excuse being a Londoner - he should have known. even if he didn;t - once told he should have just accepted that it was offensive and apologised.

Well, I've worked in that London for ooooh 8 years now... and I still didn't know. Do you get updates from the politcal correctness police on what words are OK and not OK if you live in London?

My point was more that it's a bit daft to get so wound up about it. I'm sure he didn't mean to cause offence.

Hmmm there are no political correctness police - but I have had a lot of black friends so it seems pretty obvious to me.

I'm not wound up about it - but Spen is wrong and he needs to back down and apologise

Porgy

spen666 wrote:

mcj78 wrote:

Spen666 - you used a term that DDD finds offensive & I can see why some people would - you can't tell people what is offensive to them, it's entirely his perogative to choose whether or not he is offended by such a term - arguing that it's not an offensive term as it was acceptable to use in the '80s doesn't really wash i'm afraid. Times change, the 80's were 30 years ago & i'd like to think the country has come on leaps & bounds in terms of racial fairness since then.

Erm i've not tried to tell DDD what is offensive to him.

Why make up false accusations?

Last year my footy team went up to the very north of Scotland for a friendly & some shennanigans for the weekend - my Tanzanian mate was a hit with the whole town including a friendly (yet blazing drunk) old guy who demanded to buy him a pint and get his life story as he couldn't remember the last time there had "been a darkie" in the town... hardly the most PC of language but he genuinely never contemplated causing offence by usuing (by modern terms) outdated language in describing someone's appearance. No offence was taken incidentally as my mate coouldn't understand a word he was saying, but someone at some point whispered in the old boy's ear that wasn't an acceptable "descrtiptor" any more, if it ever was & he was mortified at the thought of offending the new coolest guy in town.

So, by reasonable rationale if i'd inadvertently upset anyone by an unfortunate choice of words i'd simply appologise for any offence caused & move on with it, not try & justify the use of said term.

I myself am a pain in the ars* & will admit that quite happily, others might strike you if you called them that & so on & so on.

Group hug?

J

spen - why didn;t you use the word "nigger"?

lost_in_thought

Porgy wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Well you live in the outback - spen has no such excuse being a Londoner - he should have known. even if he didn;t - once told he should have just accepted that it was offensive and apologised.

Well, I've worked in that London for ooooh 8 years now... and I still didn't know. Do you get updates from the politcal correctness police on what words are OK and not OK if you live in London?

My point was more that it's a bit daft to get so wound up about it. I'm sure he didn't mean to cause offence.

Hmmm there are no political correctness police - but I have had a lot of black friends so it seems pretty obvious to me.

I'm not wound up about it - but Spen is wrong and he needs to back down and apologise

No, no, you're right, reading back it doesn't sound like anyone is remotely wound up about anything!

spen666

Porgy wrote:

woodford2barbican wrote:

BNP are a legitimate political party.

I'd say they're legal - but not necessarily legitimate - see defintion 2.

le·git·i·mate (l-jt-mt)
adj.

1. Being in compliance with the law; lawful: a legitimate business.
2. Being in accordance with established or accepted patterns and standards: legitimate advertising practices.
3. Based on logical reasoning; reasonable: a legitimate solution to the problem.
4. Authentic; genuine: a legitimate complaint.
5. Born of legally married parents: legitimate issue.
6. Of, relating to, or ruling by hereditary right: a legitimate monarch.
7. Of or relating to drama of high professional quality that excludes burlesque, vaudeville, and some forms of musical comedy: the legitimate theater.

Erm yes, but are you ignoring No 1

They are a legitimate party on what you have posted.

By your logic.

The labour party do not meet number 6 so are they not legitimate either?
the tories may be said by some to not comply with No £ so, are they not legitimate either?

Porgy

lost_in_thought wrote:

Porgy wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Well you live in the outback - spen has no such excuse being a Londoner - he should have known. even if he didn;t - once told he should have just accepted that it was offensive and apologised.

Well, I've worked in that London for ooooh 8 years now... and I still didn't know. Do you get updates from the politcal correctness police on what words are OK and not OK if you live in London?

My point was more that it's a bit daft to get so wound up about it. I'm sure he didn't mean to cause offence.

Hmmm there are no political correctness police - but I have had a lot of black friends so it seems pretty obvious to me.

I'm not wound up about it - but Spen is wrong and he needs to back down and apologise

No, no, you're right, reading back it doesn't sound like anyone is remotely wound up about anything!

I type quickly and with minimum of words as i'm trying to do job at same time. If this gives impression of me being wound up then it is erronous.

Nice distraction technique by the way - this is not about me being wound up or not. Spen is definitely wound up - I imagine him foaming at the mouth right now.

spen666

UndercoverElephant wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Who exactly are this mythical PC brigade anyway?

You can get in tough with them by dialling 999.

and if I only want to get soft with them?

Porgy

spen666 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

woodford2barbican wrote:

BNP are a legitimate political party.

I'd say they're legal - but not necessarily legitimate - see defintion 2.

le·git·i·mate (l-jt-mt)
adj.

1. Being in compliance with the law; lawful: a legitimate business.
2. Being in accordance with established or accepted patterns and standards: legitimate advertising practices.
3. Based on logical reasoning; reasonable: a legitimate solution to the problem.
4. Authentic; genuine: a legitimate complaint.
5. Born of legally married parents: legitimate issue.
6. Of, relating to, or ruling by hereditary right: a legitimate monarch.
7. Of or relating to drama of high professional quality that excludes burlesque, vaudeville, and some forms of musical comedy: the legitimate theater.

Erm yes, but are you ignoring No 1

They are a legitimate party on what you have posted.

By your logic.

The labour party do not meet number 6 so are they not legitimate either?
the tories may be said by some to not comply with No £ so, are they not legitimate either?

number one is just legal - so when you say legal and legitimate you are being tautological and you actually mean legal and legal - legitimate must have a different meaning in that phrase, surely, for the phrase to be meaningful. Or not - you tell me Mr legal expert.

Oh and why didn;t you use the word nigger - Mr 'words are not offensive'?

spen666

Porgy wrote:

....

I type quickly and with minimum of words as i'm trying to do job at same time. If this gives impression of me being wound up then it is erronous.

Nice distraction technique by the way - this is not about me being wound up or not. Spen is definitely wound up - I imagine him foaming at the mouth right now.

Oh the irony of this post