Well, Well, Well...

[spot]

The advantage of the written word, Issie, is that the thread stays here and everyone reading it can make their own mind up on what's been said.

I don't suppose you'd fancy the short-format BNP discussion, since oscar won't face up to it?

[gmc]

oscar;1292171 wrote: I offered you half an apology. I'm feeling generous today and I do have much sympathy for any-one who truely believes that the SNP will oust GB from Fife. Remember you stating that GB would lose his seat In the Glenrothes By-Election??? Also, You are to be Pitied for your Idea of an Independent Scotland and Salmond as your saviour.

So why do BNP members need help? Do you think you know some-thing we don't? Such as your prediction for Glenrothes?


:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

I have never claimed that gordon brown would lose his seat in the glenrothes by election. Not least because he isn't actually an MP for Glenrothes. He did defend his seat, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, in the 2005 general election. However He will have to defend his seat at the next election and he may well lose it who knows.



posted by Oscar

you end up with a strange confused view of things and lose the ability to construct sentences and think coherently and keep taking things out of context, either deliberately or because they can't understand more than a line at a time. .




OK you're not doing it deliberately you're doing it because you don't read the posts properly. My apologies I overestimated you.

Posted by izzie

Where you around in the 1970's? because I can assure you that for ordinary folks it was not clear, and I never gave John Major the authority to sign the Maastricht Treaty...it was dressed up as free trade between the other European countries, and do you think folks were as politically motivated and informed in the 70's, as they are today.?




Actually I was, one of the unemployed sitting round a candle. I voted yes by the way. As it happens I think people were more politically motivated and informed than they are now. Something got knocked out of Britain with the thatcher years and all labour have brought is despair. Even the BNP had a bit more get up and go in those years, BNP membership has fallen away quite a lot from those years has it not?

But you did give John major the authority, his party was elected to rule, with a majority of the seats the fact that most people don't want your party in power and hate your guts doesn't really matter does it-just ask Maggie and Tony. We need electoral reform, until we get it we're stuck in the ****.

posted by issie

Nice, first you tell me I'm talking bolloxs and now you insinuate I'm a half wit, you're amazing

I suppose it's a good job that this half wit knew where to put a suppository, but in some people there isn't much difference between the oral route and the anal route because both orifices are filled with poo, and this half wit must have got all the letters behind her name including a degree in acute and critical care, by reading the Beano comic.


OK I take it back you're not a half wit. That you read the beano does suggest you have a bit more between the ears than the typical Daily Mail read at least you have the wits to appreciate a scottish cultural institution. :sneaky:

[Ahso!]

BOO! :wah:

[Oscar Namechange]

gmc;1292202 wrote: :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

I have never claimed that gordon brown would lose his seat in the glenrothes by election.



Oh excuse me Oh Caber Tossing one but I think you'll find you did.

Here Is a thread I put on after the result containing your pitiful excuse as to why the SNP failed miserably.

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/curre ... othes.html

How many times do I have to tell you? I may not be arssed to use my spell check but please have the manners to use Capital Latters when refering to our Illustrious Leader.

[gmc]

oscar;1292214 wrote: Oh excuse me Oh Caber Tossing one but I think you'll find you did.

Here Is a thread I put on after the result containing your pitiful excuse as to why the SNP failed miserably.

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/curre ... othes.html

How many times do I have to tell you? I may not be arssed to use my spell check but please have the manners to use Capital Latters when refering to our Illustrious Leader.


I'll type it again slowly so you can keep up. I never claimed gordon brown would lose his seat in the Glenrothes by election for the simple reason he was not actually standing in the by election. He does not have a Glenrothes seat in the first place. He is the MP for kirkcaldy and cowdenbeath.

Please concentrate and try and read the posts properly.

[Issie]

gmc said:

Something got knocked out of Britain with the thatcher years and all labour have brought is despair
Now that is something that we both agree on, and yes I was aware that both the Beano and the Dandy comics are connected to Dundee, and I haven't had to run along and google it.

We need electoral reform, until we get it we're stuck in the ****.
Agreed, desperation creeps in and I was looking at the Labour achievements the other night, and I thought to myself "nobody can make a bigger mess than this", I shook my head in disbelief and I could cry when I see what Great Britain has become....in fact some days I wish I could bring Guy Fawkes back and this time he succeeded. (being flippant here)

I remember and I will never forget what the Tories did 25 years ago, they took the soul out of Britain that’s the word you’re searching for. They threw thousands of men on the scrap heap, destroyed communities, turned brother against brother and created the first generation sink estates dependant on benefits.

They deregulated banks and encouraged toy town building societies to become banks, they created the bubble of greed, Gordon Brown had plenty of time to keep his eye on the industry as the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and he did nothing, except today put a debt around my children’s shoulders and most probably my grandchildren’s, which is going to take longer to pay off, than the years I may have left on this earth.

IMO: The Tories took the soul out of Britain and Labour have managed to break the backbone of the country.

So, you see I have no reason to give either of them my vote, I’m consumed with hate for the lot of the thieving barestwards.

I’ve worked all my bloody working life since leaving school, for what.? To come to this.?

OK I take it back you're not a half wit. That you read the beano does suggest you have a bit more between the ears than the typical Daily Mail read at least you have the wits to appreciate a scottish cultural institution.
Ok. Let’s start again shall we,? let’s stop the insults because while ever you or anyone else throw them at me, I will throw them back, and my tongue can be sharper than a knife when my back’s against the wall.

I don’t profess to know everything, I can only speak from experience and from the knowledge I have gain, but everybody has a right to an opinion and they should not feel that their opinion is worthless or bolloxs…..we all have fields of excellence, yours might be history, mine would be medical, another persons might be just experience of life.

I don’t care who hates the BNP because NOBODY could hate the BNP more than I hate Thatcher, I do agree with a lot of the BNP policies, I agree with nothing of the other parties, and as you can guess I don’t like people assuming that I’m some half wit NOTW reader for looking into the party, when some people have never bothered to investigate, and just spout the media indoctrination back at me.

Enough said from me, I have a project to finish off in Spanish and my profesora will be none too pleased if it’s not done.

Spot said :

I don't suppose you'd fancy the short-format BNP discussion, since oscar won't face up to it?
Spot, no thanks, you can interpret that as running scared if you like, but I don’t know enough about the party to get into a war of links with you, I know how you operate and I don’t have the time to go searching for links to prove a pedantic point…..sorry old bean, I’m not taking the bait.

[Oscar Namechange]

Issie;1292220 wrote: Spot, no thanks, you can interpret that as running scared if you like, but I don’t know enough about the party to get into a war of links with you, I know how you operate and I don’t have the time to go searching for links to prove a pedantic point…..sorry old bean, I’m not taking the bait.


That's another to the list who like myself will now not Indulge him. It's getting so tedious.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292201 wrote: The advantage of the written word, Issie, is that the thread stays here and everyone reading it can make their own mind up on what's been said.

I don't suppose you'd fancy the short-format BNP discussion, since oscar won't face up to it?


You are absolutely correct Spot. The thread and the written word does remain.

However, before you even think of critising others, be man ennough to deal with this.

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... -11-a.html

The written word does Indeed remain and your written word on the tail end of this thread when you were asked to prove your ridiculous claims was to post another cop out as to needing time to prepare. We gave you time, plenty of time, Infact, You have had since September to prove your claims. You overtly diverted away from this thread to the point, gmc and I thought you'd had an accident.

For you to suggest that any member here Is dodging the Issue when your thread was nothing but a cop out on your part, Is laughable and why, fewer and fewer people take you seriously.

[gmc]

posted by issie

Agreed, desperation creeps in and I was looking at the Labour achievements the other night, and I thought to myself "nobody can make a bigger mess than this", I shook my head in disbelief and I could cry when I see what Great Britain has become....in fact some days I wish I could bring Guy Fawkes back and this time he succeeded. (being flippant here)

I remember and I will never forget what the Tories did 25 years ago, they took the soul out of Britain that’s the word you’re searching for. They threw thousands of men on the scrap heap, destroyed communities, turned brother against brother and created the first generation sink estates dependant on benefits.

They deregulated banks and encouraged toy town building societies to become banks, they created the bubble of greed, Gordon Brown had plenty of time to keep his eye on the industry as the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and he did nothing, except today put a debt around my children’s shoulders and most probably my grandchildren’s, which is going to take longer to pay off, than the years I may have left on this earth.

IMO: The Tories took the soul out of Britain and Labour have managed to break the backbone of the country.

So, you see I have no reason to give either of them my vote, I’m consumed with hate for the lot of the thieving barestwards.

I’ve worked all my bloody working life since leaving school, for what.? To come to this.


That's depressing I actually agree with you. Gordon and Tony have made things far worse. I never thought I would dislike a politician more than I disliked thatcher. Don't think the BNP have the answer though.

Ok. Let’s start again shall we,? let’s stop the insults because while ever you or anyone else throw them at me, I will throw them back, and my tongue can be sharper than a knife when my back’s against the wall.

I don’t profess to know everything, I can only speak from experience and from the knowledge I have gain, but everybody has a right to an opinion and they should not feel that their opinion is worthless or bolloxs…..we all have fields of excellence, yours might be history, mine would be medical, another persons might be just experience of life.


I was going to say you started it but then I looked back at the thread and perhaps on reflection maybe you think I did. My saying you were talking a load of bollocks is just a forthright way of saying I disagree with you and thought you were talking nonsense it wasn't intended as an insult. So if you took it as that I apologise. I still think your comment on the BNP was total rubbish though. Bollocks is just a more expressive way of saying the same thing. You shouldn't feel your opinion is worthless but on a forum like this you will get people who disagree with you so don't take it personally. You will notice everybody disagrees with oscar but that's because she spouts a load of rubbish most of the time. That was a friendly insult in case you were wondering.

[Oscar Namechange]

gmc;1292227 wrote: oscar but that's because she spouts a load of rubbish most of the time. That was a friendly insult in case you were wondering.


Tosser.

But of course that was a friendly Insult incase you were wondering.

[Issie]

The advantage of the written word, Issie, is that the thread stays here and everyone reading it can make their own mind up on what's been said.
The disadvantage of the written word Spot, is that there is no emotion and these silly emotional icons come as second thought to me, but if you had been stood next to me whilst I poured out my feelings in my previous post, you would have seen the tears in my eyes.....I can't display that in the written word.

No I'm no depressive softie fluffy bunny, I'm as hard as nails at times, I've been trained to put emotions on the back burner, otherwise I'd have never done my job.

gmc...

Let's just move on shall we.? It wasn't so much the bolloxs that riled me, but the half-wit comment, and it was the troll having a go at me, after I have not been in here for quite some time.

Believe me, you wouldn't want to see me when I do get angry. :yh_rotfl

Forget it, move on and hold no grudges....I can hold my own in a forum.

[spot]

Issie;1292232 wrote: The disadvantage of the written word Spot, is that there is no emotion and these silly emotional icons come as second thought to me, but if you had been stood next to me whilst I poured out my feelings in my previous post, you would have seen the tears in my eyes.....I can't display that in the written word.:oYour outmoded generation is history, Issie. The new world's going to outlive you. Britain's not only multicultural, it's growing to enjoy being multicultural. All the fogies who want to turn the clock back are going the way of the dodo. The future's bright but it doesn't include Jingoist knee-jerk Empire nostalgia looking disdainfully at lesser breeds.

[Issie]

All the fogies who want to turn the clock back are going the way of the dodo.


You're wrong, I'm a senior citizen thank you, I wouldn't want to turn the clock back, there was no fun having a tin bath, no central heating and an outside toilet, but we had something that wasn't the me, me, me, attitude.

Do you think I had tears in my eyes for myself.? My years are now numbered, but I fear for my grandchildren and what the world will be like...the way we are going is NOT the right way and nobody will convince me otherwise, so save your breath.

[spot]

Issie;1292244 wrote: I fear for my grandchildren and what the world will be like...the way we are going is NOT the right way and nobody will convince me otherwise, so save your breath.


I have no expectation of changing your mind, what made you think it was on my agenda? I post to express my opinion. As to where the composition of British residents is headed, time will tell. As to whether the Western armed forces are going to come home leaving an anti-Western theatre behind them, time will tell there too. There's self-interest and there's humanity. The sooner we reach a position where narrow self-interest is set aside the better. It's the "me me me" attitude I'm criticizing, you might sit back a moment and recognize that.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292237 wrote: Your outmoded generation is history, Issie. The new world's going to outlive you. Britain's not only multicultural, it's growing to enjoy being multicultural. All the fogies who want to turn the clock back are going the way of the dodo. The future's bright but it doesn't include Jingoist knee-jerk Empire nostalgia looking disdainfully at lesser breeds.
Then tell me this. Do you seriously believe India would tolerate millions of non-Indians taking over that society? Or Pakistan tolerating millions of Hindus or Christians entering that country and changing it from a Muslim society into something else? Or Japan? Or China.? So why are we expected to be the dumping ground for mass uncontrolled Immigration that has been allowed purely to get votes?

Can anyone imagine Saudi Arabia allowing the mass Immigration of Christians, so that in a few decades it would no longer be an Islamic country?

Each nation has the right to maintain Its own identity. The right of India to remain Indian, the right of China to remain Chinese, the right of Pakistan to remain Pakistani and the right of Saudi Arabia to remain Saudi does not mean that any of these nations “hate” anybody else. But God forbid we oppose mass Immigration, we are naturally rabid rascists In the eyes of those too frightened to confess It concerns them also.

Do you know Spot, I won't be around but If mass Immigration Is allowed to continue as It has been, I can truely predict a Holy War In this country 50 years from now.

All it means is that they wish to preserve their identity and national existence.

[fuzzywuzzy]

All it means is that they wish to preserve their identity and national existence.


Yep you're right oscar, the original inhabitants would hate it ...eventually.......... if anyone did that to them. *snigger, cough*.

Hang on I'll just ask my Koori friend here .:yh_rotfl

[spot]

Millions of non-Indians? India currently has something over a million residents who migrated from Tibet, around twenty million migrants from Bangladesh, upward of a quarter million from Sri Lanka, etc etc. Fine, you'll say, there's lots of room in India; actually there's about 40% more people per square mile living there than there are in the United Kingdom. "Taking over" is a loaded way of describing migration. Nobody's taking over Britain, what's happening is a redefinition of what British means. Migrants in any country live differently to the way they lived in their country of origin, their descendants far more so.

The land will always be here. It will have people who all form a part of the history of the land. The way the story is progressing pleases me. It doesn't please you. Fortunately the proportion of the population who aren't enjoying it isn't and never will be a majority.

As for Saudi Arabia, I'd enjoy seeing its citizens dismantle its Constitution and preferably bankrupting its Royal House in the process. But I'd absolutely hate to see anyone else do it. What's happening in Britain is the choice of the British and long may it remain so.

[Issie]

What's happening in Britain is the choice of the British and long may it remain so
That's about the biggest load of toss I've ever heard.

How do you know what the British want.?

Were the British asked if they wanted mass immigration on the scale that this Island has been subjected to.?

Fortunately the proportion of the population who aren't enjoying it isn't and never will be a majority.
Is that fact? or just one of your crystal ball predictions.

If you go ask the immigrants if they like it, don't use too many brain cells up figuring out the answer, go ask others around the country and you may be suprised.

[spot]

Issie;1292318 wrote: [quote=spot]What's happening in Britain is the choice of the British and long may it remain soThat's about the biggest load of toss I've ever heard.

How do you know what the British want.?

Were the British asked if they wanted mass immigration on the scale that this Island has been subjected to.?I remember this tone of intransigent bigotry but I have to go back a way to find an instance you'll know of. Newsagents with cards renting rooms in London, one after another after another saying "no blacks, no Irish". Remember them? Would you like to go back there?

I didn't say "What's happening in Britain was the choice of the British", I said "is". I'm quite certain that if you go back far enough you'll find a majority in the country who'd be horrified at the level of multiculturalism we've reached, just as if you go back in Mississippi you'd find a majority of whites who'd be disgusted at the more equal opportunities now enjoyed by black Americans. Some of them - and some of the British - changed their minds. Some, like you, haven't. The reason I don't much mind is that the following generations are more capable of adjustment and acceptance.

Issie wrote: [quote=spot]Fortunately the proportion of the population who aren't enjoying it isn't and never will be a majority.Is that fact? or just one of your crystal ball predictions.How about Poll - Race Is No Barrier To 'Being British' as an indication?The majority of people in Britain appear to have embraced a sense of multiculturalism, with almost nine in 10 saying that being British is not about being white. But whilst 86% of the British public disagree that to be truly British you have to be white, there is no consistent view on what it means to be British.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292284 wrote: Millions of non-Indians? India currently has something over a million residents who migrated from Tibet, around twenty million migrants from Bangladesh, upward of a quarter million from Sri Lanka, etc etc. Fine, you'll say, there's lots of room in India; actually there's about 40% more people per square mile living there than there are in the United Kingdom. "Taking over" is a loaded way of describing migration. Nobody's taking over Britain, what's happening is a redefinition of what British means. Migrants in any country live differently to the way they lived in their country of origin, their descendants far more so.

The land will always be here. It will have people who all form a part of the history of the land. The way the story is progressing pleases me. It doesn't please you. Fortunately the proportion of the population who aren't enjoying it isn't and never will be a majority.

As for Saudi Arabia, I'd enjoy seeing its citizens dismantle its Constitution and preferably bankrupting its Royal House in the process. But I'd absolutely hate to see anyone else do it. What's happening in Britain is the choice of the British and long may it remain so.


Your living In a Parallel Universe.

I must admit that I was quite concerned about Canvassing for the BNP but I can say with every conviction that I have never had a negative response. Something I find Ironic and frustrating Is that the moment you declare you are representing the BNP, the member of the public will Immediately jump to the Immigration Issue. That slightly peeves me as the BNP also have excellent Policies on Heath, Education etc. However, the reason members of the public Immediately jump to the Immigration Issue Is because they are genuinly concerned but this Loony Left government and the Liberal Bleeding Hearts have made them In fear of speaking out. Some I have met even believed they could be prosecuted if they spoke out about Immigration. That is the clear message and path your Government has sent out.

Spot, I very much doubt that you have ever been out canvassing. My Cousin has been the Labour Candidate for Lockleaze for some years and has been In Politics all her life and stood In many elections. Even she tells us that the main concern of the electorate Is Immigration and that's coming from a Labour Candidate.

The truth of It Is this... would your Government give us a Referendum on Immigration? If they ever did, you'd be In for a shock. You come across as this highly Intelligent man on this forum but I'm having my doubts. You seem to not be In the real world Spot. I have shown you In this thread that the report on Immigration by the Labour Party was the subject of an Intense Enquirey and found to be fundamentaly flawed, yet you continue to believe It.

Also, out of Interest Spot, how many Immigrants call round your house of a week because we have the full gambit round here. I work with them, they are my neighbours and my friends and have done for many years since they settled In this country. Although we have never actually fallen out, there are huge cultural differences and The Iraqi's are different to the Lithuanians and the Poles are differnet to the Pakistani. You simply can not pour thousands and thousands of different races Into one country and expect total harmony. It happens all over the world when people Migrate. We are experiencing crimes In this country that were never heard of 20 years ago. Honour Killings are Increasing for example.

I have also sat on the housing committee and chaired residents meetings. What do you do Spot? Or am I bragging again?

You dismiss any-one that does not agree with you on this forum because of your self-Inflicted egotistical personality.

I was a member of the Labour Party for 30 years and then I woke up. You represent a Party of tax-fiddling crooks. Even Cameron has accused the Government of Ignoring concerns from Migrationwatch and continuing with mass Immigration purely to make the Right look rascists and secure votes for the Labour Party. I suggest that you are the Un-Intelligent one If you can't see that.

[Issie]

I couldn't give a flying fig about what happens in India or Mississippi, stop quoting stuff that is irrelevant to the problems of the UK.

Spot said

What's happening in Britain is the choice of the British and long may it remain so
That's total nonsense and you know it is, because unless you want a riot, there was no choice, it was forced upon the British and when there are laws as tight as a duck's @rse to stop anyone voicing an opinion, you have silenced people, but you will never change what people truly think, and why do you have to bring colour into the conversation.? Why have you shifted the problem of immigration onto colour, do you think I don't know that you can be every skin colour under the sun and be British.?

Now you're living in the past with your bigotry because it's not about colour, today it's about clashes of culture and numbers, and the British culture.

Some, like you, haven't. The reason I don't much mind is that the following generations are more capable of adjustment and acceptance
So now you know how I view multiculturalism do you.? even the immigrants are fed up of the immigrants...work that one out....go running off now for your favourite hobby of finding a link, because links are about as useful as toilet paper.......opinions change and opinion polls can be rigged by the simple way in which the question is asked and fed into a computer, and links become outdated and challenged....and of course there's always the problem of who's funding the survey.

People like me? who are people like me,? ah the type you class as old fogies instead of showing some respect and giving me my correct title....

Spot you're a condescending twot, always right, never wrong, infact I bet your pee boils when someone proves you wrong in here.

There's no wonder people avoid you like the plague in here....keep out of my face unless you want me to lose my manners, and the next time you call me an old fogie, remember that this old fogie worked her @rse off for this country, along with millions of other old fogies, without the cushion of whinging for benefits.

You've just shown your true colour, a generation that has no respect for its elders, at least I know of other countries/ cultures that do...what another hypocrite you are, practice what you preach.

[spot]

oscar wrote: Your living In a Parallel Universe.Is there any particularly good reason why you continue to confuse your Daily Mail article of 2008 with the 2009 report I quoted? You keep doing it as though it's either meaningful or significant and it's actually totally dissociated. The 2009 report I quoted is an academic study, unrelated to any government report, of impeccable credentials and (so far as I'm aware) entirely unchallenged by anyone.

As for the MORI poll, they do them by phone. There's no intimidation. Unlike, if you'll pardon the observation, doorstepping. Tell her what she wants to hear or we'll get turds through the letterbox.

[Issie]

Spot said:

Is there any particularly good reason why you continue to confuse your Daily Mail article of 2008 with the 2009 report I quoted? You keep doing it as though it's either meaningful or significant and it's actually totally dissociated. The 2009 report I quoted is an academic study, unrelated to any government report, of impeccable credentials and (so far as I'm aware) entirely unchallenged by anyone.
Keep taking the medication Spot because I haven't posted any DM links in here, and I haven't the fainted clue what you're talking about.

Ah I see now you've edited your post to direct your post to Oscar.

[spot]

Issie;1292353 wrote: I couldn't give a flying fig about what happens in India or Mississippi, stop quoting stuff that is irrelevant to the problems of the UK.I'll put that down to confusion, shall I? It was oscar who raised India, not me. I mentioned it while replying to her post.

You see problems, Issie. I don't. I see more and more young people bringing their two cultural heritages together and raising a mixed family learning from both.

If you can post the way you posted and at the same time demand respect for elders I suspect you'll have to whistle a long time.

[spot]

Issie;1292357 wrote: Keep taking the medication Spot because I haven't posted any DM links in here, and I haven't the fainted clue what you're talking about.


Never mind dear. Some of it's to oscar, some of it's to you. You'll get the hang of it eventually.

[Oscar Namechange]

Issie;1292353 wrote: Now you're living in the past with your bigotry because it's not about colour, today it's about clashes of culture and numbers, and the British culture.

: Your Bang on there. It is not about colour. That's Spot's way of trying to Imply we are racist . Until they open their mouths, you would not know that the Poles or Lithuanians for example were Immigrants.

I very much doubt that Spot lives so closely with Muslims as I do. What I can tell you with every conviction Is this. My friends came here for a better way of life and to rid themselvesof the restrictions of the ME especially the woman who are treated as third rate. They saw England as a life of freedom and prosperitiy. They came with their own money and set up business's contributing to our country.

They have been here 12 years now and are disgusted by the way our Country has gone. They often say to me 'But why does your Government let this happen'? They see Immigrants who arrive with nothing, claim every benifit going and then get the backlash because they feel they are tarred with the same brush. They cringe every time they read another Sharia court has set up. So even when the Immigrants are complaining, that must tell Spot something. I suggest he gets out more. maybe he should do some canvassing in a shopping Mall as I do and find out exactly how the electorate feel. I suspect he won't.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292360 wrote: Never mind dear. Some of it's to oscar, some of it's to you. You'll get the hang of it eventually. So that's what It comes down to every time. When Spot can find any further links to copy and paste, he resorts to Insults. Typical labour incumbent.

[spot]

oscar;1292363 wrote: So that's what It comes down to every time. When Spot can find any further links to copy and paste, he resorts to Insults. Typical labour incumbent.


In response to "Keep taking the medication Spot"? Come on old girl, fair play and all that.

[Issie]

If you can post the way you posted and at the same time demand respect for elders I suspect you'll have to whistle a long time.
Stop trying to crawl out of the hole you've dug yourself in.

Did I hit a raw nerve. the truth always hurts doesn't it.? :yh_rotfl

[gmc]

oscar;1292362 wrote: Your Bang on there. It is not about colour. That's Spot's way of trying to Imply we are racist . Until they open their mouths, you would not know that the Poles or Lithuanians for example were Immigrants.

I very much doubt that Spot lives so closely with Muslims as I do. What I can tell you with every conviction Is this. My friends came here for a better way of life and to rid themselvesof the restrictions of the ME especially the woman who are treated as third rate. They saw England as a life of freedom and prosperitiy. They came with their own money and set up business's contributing to our country.

They have been here 12 years now and are disgusted by the way our Country has gone. They often say to me 'But why does your Government let this happen'? They see Immigrants who arrive with nothing, claim every benifit going and then get the backlash because they feel they are tarred with the same brush. They cringe every time they read another Sharia court has set up. So even when the Immigrants are complaining, that must tell Spot something. I suggest he gets out more. maybe he should do some canvassing in a shopping Mall as I do and find out exactly how the electorate feel. I suspect he won't.


In that case it will be interesting to see if any join the BNP. I too knew muslim immigrants that were annoyed at some of their countrymen. I remember one east african muslim woman telling me with great glee that were a fair number of divorces as the women realised they could get jobs and be financially independent of their men. A lot took advantage of their new freedom.

There is a double standard in that you are not supposed to point out that fundamentalist muslims are also racist and most definitely sectarian. At least the BNP don't kill white women that go out with muslim boys for the sake of the family's honour.

[spot]

Issie;1292367 wrote: Stop trying to crawl out of the hole you've dug yourself in.

Did I hit a raw nerve. the truth always hurts doesn't it.? :yh_rotfl


Oh stop walking past everything you simply dislike, Issie. You asked me to demonstrate my opinion had support, I did and you completely blanked it out. It's real. It's reputable. Just because it fails to cohere with your old-fashioned ways doesn't mean it's not a legitimate statement. Here it is again...

Issie wrote: [quote=spot]Fortunately the proportion of the population who aren't enjoying it isn't and never will be a majority.Is that fact? or just one of your crystal ball predictions.How about Poll - Race Is No Barrier To 'Being British' as an indication?The majority of people in Britain appear to have embraced a sense of multiculturalism, with almost nine in 10 saying that being British is not about being white. But whilst 86% of the British public disagree that to be truly British you have to be white, there is no consistent view on what it means to be British.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292365 wrote: In response to "Keep taking the medication Spot"? Come on old girl, fair play and all that.
'Old Girl' ???? I suggest you take a look In your mirror 'Old Boy'

[Issie]

The majority of people in Britain appear to have embraced a sense of multiculturalism, with almost nine in 10 saying that being British is not about being white. But whilst 86% of the British public disagree that to be truly British you have to be white, there is no consistent view on what it means to be British.
Spot, does that agree with what I said that you can be every skin tone under the sun and be British.?

That has got nothing to do with immigration numbers and clashes of culture, and note the word "appear" to have embraced....

The fact that you can be thrown in prison for mentioning someone's skin tone wouldn't have anything to do with the "appear" would it.?

OK I'll put another slant on this....

I'm very much involved with Spain, I have many Spanish friends that I've acquired over the 30 odd years I've been going to Spain.

Let's take the British who like to be known as ex-pats.

There's nothing ex-pat about them, to the Spanish they are immigrants and do you think the Spanish like it when they live in their concrete urbanisations and can't speak the lingo apart from "dos cervezas por favor."?

Do you think the Spanish Government pay for translation services for those who cannot be @rsed to learn the lingo.? Do you think you will get any help at all unless you have paid into the system.?

My point is, that colour is not the issue in Spain, but they still resent immigrants.

Take a Latin American immigrant in Spain, they fit in better because they can speak the language and hold the same traditions. fiestas etc.

Take a British person who isolates themselves and knows nothing about Spanish culture, they will never fit in or be accepted....simple.!

[Oscar Namechange]

Issie;1292381 wrote: Spot, does that agree with what I said that you can be every skin tone under the sun and be British.?

That has got nothing to do with immigration numbers and clashes of culture, and note the word "appear" to have embraced....

The fact that you can be thrown in prison for mentioning someone's skin tone wouldn't have anything to do with the "appear" would it.?

OK I'll put another slant on this....

I'm very much involved with Spain, I have many Spanish friends that I've acquired over the 30 odd years I've been going to Spain.

Let's take the British who like to be known as ex-pats.

There's nothing ex-pat about them, to the Spanish they are immigrants and do you think the Spanish like it when they live in their concrete urbanisations and can't speak the lingo apart from "dos cervezas por favor."?

Do you think the Spanish Government pay for translation services for those who cannot be @rsed to learn the lingo.? Do you think you will get any help at all unless you have paid into the system.?

My point is, that colour is not the issue in Spain, but they still resent immigrants.

Take a Latin American immigrant in Spain, they fit in better because they can speak the language and hold the same traditions. fiestas etc.

Take a British person who isolates themselves and knows nothing about Spanish culture, they will never fit in or be accepted....simple.! Spooky Issie. I was about to mention the 'Ex Pat' Issue and why they are now looking at re-patronising Into Britian.

I'll just add to that... Has Spot seen the way any Westerner Is treated In the ME? Even the Christian Aid Workers?

[Ahso!]

spot;1292371 wrote: Oh stop walking past everything you simply dislike, Issie. You asked me to demonstrate my opinion had support, I did and you completely blanked it out. It's real. It's reputable. Just because it fails to cohere with your old-fashioned ways doesn't mean it's not a legitimate statement. Here it is again...

How about Poll - Race Is No Barrier To 'Being British' as an indication?The majority of people in Britain appear to have embraced a sense of multiculturalism, with almost nine in 10 saying that being British is not about being white. But whilst 86% of the British public disagree that to be truly British you have to be white, there is no consistent view on what it means to be British.Thats an interesting poll and revealing on the subject of group selection. For instance;There is also a rough consensus among all ethnic groups on the rights and responsibilities of those who migrate to the UK. More than two thirds (69%) of the GB population, and half (51%) of ethnic minority people, think ethnic minorities need to demonstrate a real commitment before they can be considered British. Three-quarters of both white (77%) and ethnic minority communities (76%) believe immigrants who do not speak English should be made to learn it. Highlighting is mine.

Another revealing thing, which is not easily deciphered from the poll is its difficult for Highly Sensitive People (Aspies) whom are completely unaware of their "condition" to not just walk by what they dislike because they are so emotionally driven, Spot. Trying to rationalize with people such as that is a waste of time. Had the poll gone further, it may have become evident the best chance one has is to help these particular people see themselves for who they are. Hopefully they will then seek to adjust. Judging from the findings, It seems the poll may show that less than half of the respondents fit that category. Perhaps another poll is in order so to expand the findings on that subject.

[Oscar Namechange]

Ahso!;1292385 wrote: Thats an interesting poll and revealing on the subject of group selection. For instance; Highlighting is mine.

Another revealing thing, which is not easily deciphered from the poll is its difficult for Highly Sensitive People (Aspies) whom are completely unaware of their "condition" to not just walk by what they dislike because they are so emotionally driven, Spot. Trying to rationalize with people such as that is a waste of time. Had the poll gone further, it may have become evident the best chance one has is to help these particular people see themselves for who they are. Hopefully they will then seek to adjust. Judging from the findings, It seems the poll may show that less than half of the respondents fit that category. Perhaps another poll is in order so to expand the findings on that subject. I'll refer you to the post I made In the beggining of the thread. ANY report that the Government here has produced to show that Immigration equals GDP, is deeply flawed.

The enqirey that followed the Governments claim was as the following. they have totally dismissed all reports of Immigration vs GDP. Now what part of that do you have trouble Understanding?

The Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs is one the most respected in Parliament, including, as it does, former ministers from across the political divide.

Two former Conservative Chancellors, Norman Lamont and Nigel Lawson, sit on the panel.

Joining them are former captains of industry and internationally respected economists.

Together they spent nine months considering one the most emotive issues facing Britain in the 21st century, taking evidence from the Bank of England, dozens of population experts and economists, the CBI, the British Medical Association, local councils, the TUC, the Audit Commission, the Government's Migration Impacts Forum and Home Office ministers.

Transcripts of the evidence ran to 514 pages.

Some of the most scathing observations - including those that there is little or no benefit to the economy from immigration - were made by Lord Layard, one of the world's foremost economists.

The Eton-educated Labour peer was founder-director of the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics.

Equally critical was Liberal Democrat peer Lord Vallance, who spent his executive career with BT. He was president of the CBI from 2000 to 2002 and is a former member of the board at the Mobil Corporation.

The inquiry was led by Lord Wakeham, a former Tory leader of both the Commons and the Lords and a former Energy Secretary.

The committee has a rough split of Labour and Opposition figures. Labour members include Lord Moonie, an armed forces minister under Tony Blair.

The others are Lord Best, Lord Griffiths, Lord Kingsdown, Lord Macdonald, Lord MacGregor, Lord Oakeshott, Lord Paul, Lord Sheldon, Lord Skidelsky and Lord Turner.

The panel had an internationally respected special adviser to help compile its findings, Dr Martin Ruhs, of Oxford University's Centre on Immigration, Policy and Society.

The report was passed unanimously, with all 16 members backing its content. Insiders have described at as one of the most openly critical reports of Government policy written in recent times.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0fiAdtFnK



Now... Would you like to actually answer the question put to you from your statement earlier In the thread? Exactly hoe do Your Illegals pick up the economy?

[spot]

Issie;1292381 wrote: The fact that you can be thrown in prison for mentioning someone's skin tone wouldn't have anything to do with the "appear" would it.?

Perhaps you'd like to show me either an instance of that happening or alternatively the legislation which might permit it to happen.

[Issie]

Public Order Act 1986 (c. 64) - Statute Law Database

So Spot, if your skin is black and I call you a barestward, that's not a very nice word to use, but it can be used as an offensive word, or if your mother is not married to your father, it is quite correct.

If I call you a black barestward.........whoa, that would be intentional harrassment and racially insulting, which constitutes incitement to racial hatred, which I believe if found guilty can be a prison sentence.

Isn't there a law recently gone through Parliament in the Criminal and Justice Bill about not being able to tell "racist " jokes anymore? the penalty is up to 7 years imprisonment.? I'm not sure if that was passed or amended.

[Oscar Namechange]

Issie;1292490 wrote: Public Order Act 1986 (c. 64) - Statute Law Database

So Spot, if your skin is black and I call you a barestward, that's not a very nice word to use, but it can be used as an offensive word, or if your mother is not married to your father, it is quite correct.

If I call you a black barestward.........whoa, that would be intentional harrassment and racially insulting, which constitutes incitement to racial hatred, which I believe if found guilty can be a prison sentence.

Isn't there a law recently gone through Parliament in the Criminal and Justice Bill about not being able to tell "racist " jokes anymore? the penalty is up to 7 years imprisonment.? I'm not sure if that was passed or amended.
You are Correct Issie.

It is not controversial to state that the Right to free speech is fundamental to Western legal, political and social systems. Indeed, it is entrenched in the American Constitutional in the First Amendment, and in the European Convention on Human Rights Article 10. It is also fair to say that the issues surrounding racist conduct are emotive. Racist conduct covers a wide range of offences, among which racist speech may be considered of lesser import. However, racist speech alone causes offence and can be deeply threatening and may have a severe effect on the victim, especially if it compounded by violent threats.

In order to consider whether the regulation of racist speech can be justified it is necessary to consider what these regulations control and why they do so. It is suggested that only if the control mechanism is proportional to the reason for the control can it be said to be justified.

The Law

The criminal law in the UK is able to tackle the issue in a number of ways by the application of a number of provisions. Racist speech is punishable under the Public Order Act 1984. S4A does not require any act of violence. It is an offence under s4A if threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour are used, or such material is displayed and which causes a person “harassment”, “alarm” or “distress” and the offender intends to cause harassment, alarm or distress. It is a defence for the accused to prove he was (a) in a dwelling, and had no reason to think that the conduct would be seen or heard by anyone outside that dwelling, or (b) his conduct was reasonable. For this offence it is sufficient that the victim is alarmed or distressed providing that that was the intention of the defendant. It is unclear in what circumstances such conduct would be reasonable, but reasonableness is to be determined objectively. This could be perhaps be found where the display of an aborted foetus in an anti-abortion campaign was considered reasonable by the magistrates trying the case. It should be remembered that there is no requirement of ‘breach of the peace’ and it is sufficient that distress is intended and caused. This would suggest that the purpose of these provisions is to control insulting and offensive intentions. Although there must be a victim who is offended, this appears very close to regulating thoughts, beliefs and intentions providing these have some manifestation.

S5 makes it an offence for a person to use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour or to display material which is threatening, abusive or insulting if it is within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress by it. It is a defence to show that (a) he had no reason to think that there was anyone within ear-shot or sight that would be harassed, abused or distressed, (b) he was inside a dwelling or (c) that his conduct was reasonable. It is possible that this offence may be committed even if the defendant does not intend to abuse or insult the victim providing he is aware that his conduct “may be disorderly” (s6). This offence has been interpreted broadly in a public order context, for example in DPP v Orum it was held that the offence may be committed even where the only person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress is a police officer. This is an important point to note, especially with the recent drive by the police force to recruit more officers from ethnic minorities as this case recognises that, although police officers may become more used to verbal abuse, they are still able to be insulted or distressed by it.

[Ahso!]

Issie;1292381 wrote:

The fact that you can be thrown in prison for mentioning someone's skin tone
Issie;1292490 wrote: Public Order Act 1986 (c. 64) - Statute Law Database

So Spot, if your skin is black and I call you a barestward, that's not a very nice word to use, but it can be used as an offensive word, or if your mother is not married to your father, it is quite correct.

If I call you a black barestward.........whoa, that would be intentional harrassment and racially insulting, which constitutes incitement to racial hatred, which I believe if found guilty can be a prison sentence.

Isn't there a law recently gone through Parliament in the Criminal and Justice Bill about not being able to tell "racist " jokes anymore? the penalty is up to 7 years imprisonment.? I'm not sure if that was passed or amended.Calling someone a black bastard is not merely "mentioning" skin color.

[fuzzywuzzy]

So Spot, if your skin is black and I call you a barestward, that's not a very nice word to use, but it can be used as an offensive word, or if your mother is not married to your father, it is quite correct.


Gosh !!! I thought that meaning went out decades ago.

Isn't there a law recently gone through Parliament in the Criminal and Justice Bill about not being able to tell "racist " jokes anymore? the penalty is up to 7 years imprisonment.? I'm not sure if that was passed or amended.


I think the law only covers incitement of violence.

We recently have been having "racial bashings". No one actually believes it though . the places in which the Indian students are housed are in areas that have always had a lot of violence . 'Opportunistic' would be my guess. With a few insults to boot I suppose. But now it's a diplomatic nightmare and our coppers are being called racist because we don't follow the same barbaric procedures as India.

But after my eldest son relayed an incident in a pool hall that gobsmacked even the most hardiest of those standing there I really do not believe it anymore.

Six asians (of Indian extraction) walked into a pool hall picked one white guy out and began to bash him. At that everyone came to the guys rescue. Guess what these arseholes told the police? ..apparently they were just going about their business and it was a hate/racial crime when all the people in the pool hall set upon them. :-2:-2:-2

These people are going out of their way to present their dispicable behaviour in such a way that has now caused diplomatic relations with India to be strained.

This is bigger than just race stuff it's a deliberate attempt to cause disharmony in that suburb by those crying wolf. Antagonists I think we call them.

[spot]

Issie;1292490 wrote: [quote=spot][quote=Issie]The fact that you can be thrown in prison for mentioning someone's skin tone wouldn't have anything to do with the "appear" would it.?Perhaps you'd like to show me either an instance of that happening or alternatively the legislation which might permit it to happen.Public Order Act 1986 (c. 64) - Statute Law Database

So Spot, if your skin is black and I call you a barestward, that's not a very nice word to use, but it can be used as an offensive word, or if your mother is not married to your father, it is quite correct.

If I call you a black barestward.........whoa, that would be intentional harrassment and racially insulting, which constitutes incitement to racial hatred, which I believe if found guilty can be a prison sentence.


The thing is, you see, mentioning someone's skin tone isn't the offence. Floella Benjamin's black. I saw her give a speech last year, too. I'm not committing a crime by mentioning her skin tone.

I'm only guilty of an offence if either I intend thereby to stir up racial hatred, or having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby. Those are the words. The offence is in the intent or the effect. Which is why I asked whether you had any instances which had resulted in someone being thrown into prison for it. What you wrote makes it appear that I've committed a crime in mentioning Floella Benjamin's skin tone. I'm sure you know perfectly well it's not true.

[spot]

Issie;1292490 wrote: So Spot, if your skin is black and I call you a barestward, that's not a very nice word to use, but it can be used as an offensive word


I wandered briefly into the OED to see if you had any precedent for this. I couldn't find one, there were a few alternate spellings but basically bastard is derived from the Italian/Spanish/Portuguese bastardo, "fils de bast", a pack-saddle child. What I did like was their discussion of -ard as "a formative of common nouns [...] used in French as masculine formative, intensive, augmentative, and often pejorative, cf. bastard, couard, canard, mallard, mouchard, vieillard [...] and became at length a living formative of English derivatives, as in buzzard, drunkard, laggard, sluggard, with sense of 'one who does to excess, or who does what is discreditable'."

Which makes me, I think, a postard.

[Ahso!]

spot;1292527 wrote: I wandered briefly into the OED to see if you had any precedent for this. I couldn't find one, there were a few alternate spellings but basically bastard is derived from the Italian/Spanish/Portuguese bastardo, "fils de bast", a pack-saddle child. What I did like was their discussion of -ard as "a formative of common nouns [...] used in French as masculine formative, intensive, augmentative, and often pejorative, cf. bastard, couard, canard, mallard, mouchard, vieillard [...] and became at length a living formative of English derivatives, as in buzzard, drunkard, laggard, sluggard, with sense of 'one who does to excess, or who does what is discreditable'."

Which makes me, I think, a postard.:wah: Which we all knew.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292522 wrote: The thing is, you see, mentioning someone's skin tone isn't the offence. Floella Benjamin's black. I saw her give a speech last year, too. I'm not committing a crime by mentioning her skin tone.

I'm only guilty of an offence if either I intend thereby to stir up racial hatred, or having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby. Those are the words. The offence is in the intent or the effect. Which is why I asked whether you had any instances which had resulted in someone being thrown into prison for it. What you wrote makes it appear that I've committed a crime in mentioning Floella Benjamin's skin tone. I'm sure you know perfectly well it's not true.
You of all people should know that much of It comes down to the Individual Police Officer and what charge he wants to lay. Just as an Officer can turn a blind eye, they are also capable of making It up as they go along. Anyone from an ehnic minority simply has to tell the officer that when they were spoken to by the accused, that they were In fear and the accussed will likely find them-selves being charged with a section 5 public Order Offence. This offence can vary from speaking to some-one harshly to putting them In mortal fear of violence. It Is the most common Charge In England and It is the most ambiguous. I should know !!! I actually had the Immense joy of watching some scroat get arrested on my War Memorial just before Christmas. I know what he was and was not doing as It was I who called the police. The section 5 covers a host of unpleastness but at the end of the day, It Is up to the Individual officer as to what he finds enough to apply It.

[spot]

Good good. Now all you need, in order to justify your evident fears, is an instance where it's happened. If it's never happened then it's mere paranoia.

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292574 wrote: Good good. Now all you need, in order to justify your evident fears, is an instance where it's happened. If it's never happened then it's mere paranoia.
Ok... let's take an example of one woman alone surrounded by up to 25 predominantly male youths. The noise from their jeering and yelling means the solitary woman then has to shout to be heard, She is then charged with a section 5 which Included 'Putting the person In Mortal fear of violence'. yeah Right !! If the woman was swearing, she should have been charged with a section 4. It is down to the Arresting Officer, especially when the prosecution lays an extra charge and then offers a deal to drop the section 5 charge If they plead guilty to the added charge, meaning the section 5 was a pile of crap In the First place.

I had a run In with four youths some months ago outside my home. Becuase 2 of them were black, I found myself stumbling for the correct Political term to describe them Incase the Police thought me Un-Politically correct. that Is a ridiculous position to be put In and a position that has been brought about by the Bleeding Heart Liberals. The truth of that Incident was that the two white youths did not actually contribute In any way but I felt as If I was going to be accussed because my evidence put the blame solely on the two black youths. I should never have to be put In that position. However, on that occassion I had Police Officers with ethics and Morality who spent 5 weeks tracking the main offender down until he got him.

It is not Paranoia Spot... it's real life and I suggest you get In It.

[spot]

And when did that happen? Or have you invented it?

[Oscar Namechange]

spot;1292579 wrote: And when did that happen? Or have you invented it?
:yh_rotfl I believe you know of that case very well Spot as do I.

[spot]

oscar;1292582 wrote: :yh_rotfl I believe you know of that case very well Spot as do I.


And - pardon me - this resulted in a prosecution? A prison sentence?

Issie: The fact that you can be thrown in prison for mentioning someone's skin tone wouldn't have anything to do with the "appear" would it.?

spot: Perhaps you'd like to show me either an instance of that happening or alternatively the legislation which might permit it to happen.