Leeds court last year
- Thread starter Hairymelon
- Start date
John d. You are truly a nut if you think I am on about browned skinned people. Grow up
feel free to show us some posts you have added to this thread criticising a group of people who are not brown-skinned.
Take no notice of him , he hates plumbers , construction workers apart from Noseall
p[lays the race card if any one says any thing about any 3rd world countryHates the Turks as well , hates white people , hates people that live in Surrey , hates Transexuals , hates Transvestites .
Blimey it would be easier if he listed who he does not hate
oh hates any one who did not vote labour , hates any one who voted Brexitbear in mind he may have just come back from the pub
so a little tolerance may need to be shown - Joined
- 25 Jan 2017
- Messages
- 4,726
- Reaction score
- 64
- Country
First of all: a warning for the likes of a**e end, bodd, gasbag and others that have limited attention spans: this comment is about you, and others like you, but if you choose not to read it, or are incapable of reading it, that is your choice.
I have said before, but I think it is worth repeating: issues should not be censored, or to use a**e end's phrase, "swept under the carpet". But neither should they be used for some to exercise their bigotry or explicit racism, such as that displayed by krappykid.
When we encounter illegal, or outrageously offensive behaviour we should challenge it. We almost have a duty as a society to challenge it, and a society is comprised of individuals. Whether it is sex abuse of children, exploitation of children, or bigoted exploitation of such issues, we should challenge it.
Not to challenge it means tacit acquiescence of that behaviour.
Now active concealment, denial or defence of such illegal or offensive behaviour is something altogether different and far more sinister, such as that experienced in organisations such as the Catholic Church.
When we encounter outrageously offensive comments in social media we almost have a duty to challenge it.
Not to challenge it means tacit acquiescence of that behaviour. Even worse, those comments would become the only voice, therefore the dominant voice.
We must not allow such offensive comments to become the dominant voice because a) more, similar individuals would feel empowered to add their offensive comments, that media would become a recruiting media for such individuals and b) immature or easily led people would become socialised into that dominant culture, i.e radicalised, they would believe the bigoted propaganda spread by the dominant bigoted voices.
Maybe this has been the process in the CC forum where RWR, or explicit racism has been allowed to flourish and become the dominant culture, leading to further recruitment of like-minded individuals or the radicalisation of feeble minded individuals. They have then felt empowered to spread their bigoted message into the GD forum.
===========================================
Racism is NOT allowed to flourish in the CC. If you find it, you must report it.
Mod
===========================================
Last edited by a moderator:
Or in many sectors or countries of Muslim faith. Saudi for example, Rotherham perhaps.
FGM, forced marriage etc etc.
Oh thats right, we arent allowed to discuss it on this forum because rasing such topics means people like Wannabe...Himmiewhowalkswithdonkeys or whoever he is now, will start shouting racist
- Joined
- 25 Jan 2017
- Messages
- 4,726
- Reaction score
- 64
- Country
If you wish to insist such behaviour only occurs in Muslim countries, meanwhile denying it occurs in many 'western' organisations, you deserve the 'racist' label.Or in many sectors or countries of Muslim faith. Saudi for example, Rotherham perhaps.
FGM, forced marriage etc etc.
Oh thats right, we arent allowed to discuss it on this forum because rasing such topics means people like Wannabe...Himmiewhowalkswithdonkeys or whoever he is now, will start shouting racist
Denying it occurs in 'western' organisations is tantamount to the similar cover-up that has occurred in the past in those organisations.
Abhorrent and illegal behaviour and practices are not the sole reserve of Muslim countries. They occur in all societies and all organisations.
Sometimes they are actively concealed, such as the catholic Church who then become active co-conspirators in that behaviour.
That is not the case in Rotherham, to name the one such incident that you have referred to. There was no active concealment.
I believe one of the the main investigators in Rotherham was the same person who was involved in the Orkney scandal, and was heavily criticised by several judges on that occasion.
No active concealment indeed. But the fear of people like you coming along playing the same old”your a racist” game significantly delayed bringing criminals to justice. Incidentally,you stated in an earlier post that I believe all Muslims are bad people. Nothing could be further from the truth. In just the same way you would not condemn every (Irish ) priest.
- Joined
- 25 Jan 2017
- Messages
- 4,726
- Reaction score
- 64
- Country
Talking about making stuff up. Taking a part of a sentence and quoting it out of context is exactly that, making it up.
Read the whole sentence and it will put that part of a sentence in context.
But we can both play that game:
I did not take anything out of context.
You have made a claim that I deny 'it happens in many Western organisations'.
Where is the post where I have made such a claim?
- Joined
- 25 Jan 2017
- Messages
- 4,726
- Reaction score
- 64
- Country
R E A D T H E W H O L E S E N T E N C E!
It began with, "If you wish to insist......."
It might help you to comprehend what I said. It might also help you to understand how you took my part sentence and quoted it out of context.
Stop trying to create an issue where none exists.
Similar threads
- Lincsbodger
- General Discussion
