Glamrocker Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 What I would like to know is what the events in Norway have to do with the discussion of immigration in this country be it for or against,Maybe it hasnt sunk in with Johnx yet that theres a hell of lot of people other than BNP or EDL supporters that are against immigration policies in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 What I would like to know is what the events in Norway have to do with the discussion of immigration in this country be it for or against, There is a difference between discussing immigration and deliberately falsifying statistics and making inflammatory claims in order to stir up racial hatred. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 and yet the mods are silent, classic. Perhaps - in this case - the moderators were silent because they couldn't believe that so many people could get so worked up about such a trivial point? This thread has (IMO) run pretty well. Varied opinions, but little bickering and little name calling. I think that's a good thing (YMMV). The moderators request that if you have a problem with their actions, you contact them direct. Is that so unreasonable? They also request that we don't discuss moderation in the forum ... I'd like to flex that a bit (and I hope this won't be banned ... I'm not going to discuss or criticise actual moderation.) If this was a totally un-moderated forum, Quinnwok, how long do you think it would last? Sooner or later (and probably sooner) somebody would publish a libelous statement and somebody else would issue a writ. That would probably shut the forum down - at least until the case had been heard in court. (The people who operate this forum may - or may not - make money out of it, but I doubt they would be interested in losing money and should the forum be closed because of a silly un-moderated comment, then that is what they would do.) If the forum was un-moderated and even if we managed to restrain ourselves from issuing libels (and stayed out of court) there would be bullying. I'm not talking about SHOUTING or overbearing behaviour, or even unsubstantiated accusations when somebody submits a post which you think may be at variance with your own opinion (as happened in post 137, where Purdy accused me of being a moron. You can do that sort of stuff. It's perfectly acceptable. (Especially when your rant exposes you as a narrow-minded bigot who is not prepared to accept any opinion which [you suspect - you don't even have to check] may be at variance with your own.) That's not bullying either ... but it's getting pretty close. In English law (and in debating custom) it's generally accepted that 'the shield is stronger than the sword' - The person who defends against a verbal attack may use more (verbal) force than the assailant.' Nothing wrong with that, but what if there was a serious imbalance? What if one part of this forum (and it's far bigger than 'General' or 'Sheffield' discussions) was to be hijacked by a handful of very competent (but bigoted and over-bearing) individuals? Serious rot in any one part of this forum could bring the lot down. It seems to me (and nobody told me, this is simply my opinion) that the moderators perform 3 vital tasks: 1. They protect the forum (and its operators) from avoidable and forseeable lawsuits.) 2. They 'keep it clean' - Well, at times that makes me laugh. I can talk about a (one time) steel town in South Humberside (and I can even ask 'who put the 'T' in Britain?' in the same paragraph, but I can't mention the mountain I drive through every day. I can talk about 'mushy peas' or talk about having mushies with my bacon and eggs (words which cause significant hilarity around here) but I do have to be careful. 3. - And IMO this is the most important thing they do for all of us, the users: The mods can 'level' the playing field. If somebody does step out of line, if somebody is a real anti-social asshole, the mods can take that person out of the picture - temporarily or permanently. You complained about the mods being silent. IMO, thats a bit harsh - as in 'totally unwarranted'. Would you like the moderators to jump all over anybody who expresses any opinion which varies from the 'socially accepted norm' (whatever that may be) or would you prefer them to stamp on people who hold opinions at variance with your own? I suspect that some of the moderators on this forum agree with some of the opinions expressed on this forum some of the time. I'm quite sure that none of them agrees with all of the opinions expressed all of the time. Perhaps some of them bite their tongues when they read (possibly outspoken) opinions with which they do not agree. They do not censor opinion (unless posters try to pass hatred off as 'opinion') They do censor 'swearies' (and sometimes get it wrong - but I've not seen them err on the side which might offend anybody.) I'm very grateful to the moderators and all the rest of the team on this forum. Without their efforts, the forum wouldn't exist. They are working fr me (and for you) andthey are providing a fantastic service. I don't know how much you pay them but I don't pay them a penny. Now if I could get their boss to teach me how to get people to work for me for nothing ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 There is a difference between discussing immigration and deliberately falsifying statistics and making inflammatory claims in order to stir up racial hatred. John X Racial hatred? Have you not noticed that a great many immigrants of the last few years have been white Europeans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Racial hatred? Have you not noticed that a great many immigrants of the last few years have been white Europeans? Of course there can be racial hatred between white Europeans. Hitler had it in for Slavs on a big scale. He felt that as they were racially different to Germans they had to be racially inferior. And more recently there was the matter of Yugolsavia which saw the worst atrocities in Europe since WW2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 There is a difference between discussing immigration and deliberately falsifying statistics and making inflammatory claims in order to stir up racial hatred. John X There was once a film which sums you up quite nicely John.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yB7J7DYi6M The trouble with statistics is that they are always denied if they destroy an argument. If you feel that all is fine and that to call people racist who are concerned we are entering the point of no return, then I'm afraid that's why we're in the mess we are. I think groups like the KKK and Combat 18 are racist without a doubt but to put the EDL and BNP amongst this group is wrong. They may have some nutters but most of their followers are just ordinary people who feel unrepresented by mainstream parties. I could never vote for an organisation like the BNP because they couldn't manage a council or country. I could go on an EDL march though, if I thought the particular march was right. To be against wide scale immigration and the damage its done is not racist. Asking the people who have come here to leave, is. There is a massive gap between what you claim is racist and which actually is. Your signature seems to claim that in some way people like me are responsible for children being killed. I reckon using the deaths of kids is deplorable behaviour and it is you who should hang your head in shame.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2027973/More-150-people-caught-rioting-swept-UK-foreign-nationals-deported.html Don't forget to put this in your calculations for the cost of immigration Mr Friday.. Is that 5% of all rioters arrested? That doesn't include those born here and kind of blows out of the water that immigrants were not over represented in the rioting.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 To be against wide scale immigration and the damage its done is not racist. And who exactly is claiming that it is? Your signature seems to claim that in some way people like me are responsible for children being killed. My signature claims nothing. It is a simple statement and I have accused no-one of anything. I repeat that it is interesting that it is only you, Quinnwok, Glamrocker and nightlight59 who have any objection to it. Anyway, as I said earlier I have little interest in the opinions of someone who laments that out and out racists who post on the unashamedly white supremacist St*rmfront are no longer posting here. That is not a particularly good way to but clear blue water between out and out racism and legitimate concern about immigration. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2027973/More-150-people-caught-rioting-swept-UK-foreign-nationals-deported.html Don't forget to put this in your calculations for the cost of immigration Mr Friday.. Is that 5% of all rioters arrested? That doesn't include those born here and kind of blows out of the water that immigrants were not over represented in the rioting.. ..and good riddance to them. The costs of processing and deporting 150 is hardly a major consideration in the scheme of things is it? Probably about the same in costs terms as the revenue that 20 foreign students bring into the country. I wonder what the costs have been of processing and deporting English football fans from the countries they've trashed over the years? Ps: How can someone born here be an immigrant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 And who exactly is claiming that it is? John X I'm afraid it's the most prolific playing of the 'race card' here and it's done by the nationalists "I can't say what I want to say because I'll be called a racist" accompanied by fake tears Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.