Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 5^th, 2014 at 5:36am:

Do not use racially derogatory remarks on the message board.

This is a message I received from Andrei who as we all know is guilty of some of the most vile racist tirades on this forum over the years.
I assume calling someone of Arab descent an Arab is now racist but calling Indian migrants shoe shine boys is not.
I assume Freediver is going to give Andrei a boot in the arse and revoke his moderator status.

I agree.  Very interesting.

:-/

Attacked by a notorious racist like Andrei who not only posts vile filth about asylum seekers, black africans, arabs and pretty much everyone that is not whiter than white while also heaping racial abuse on other forum members like John Smith is quite disgraceful.
I do expect that Andrei will be stripped of his moderator status and banned for harassing other forum members.

This is on the rules page:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/forum-rules.html

Racism

Discussion of racism and race related political issues is encouraged. However, politically correct language should be used when making criticism of racial policies or groups. Racism will be judged in a similar way to pornography – that is, is the criticism necessary to get a point of view across, or is it a gratuitous attack on a racial group? Note that race is treated differently from religion, which is a matter of choice and is open to the same criticism as political ideology.

From the limited investigationing I did, I agree with Andrei. You are welcome to repost the offending comments here for the purpose of discussion.

I'm not sure what this is all about, but, assuming it is this ~ given Hockey is an Arab, as Bronwyn Bishop would say, 'there is  no point of order, it is entirely accurate to refer to Joe as an Arab.'  You can call me 'Aussie Aussie' all day, and I will not be offended, and neither should anyone else on my behalf.  I'm sure Andrei is not offended when he is addressed as the 'Boer Andrei,' and I'm sure he would not be happy if anyone got all offended on his behalf.

I doubt that is where the germane problem lies however.

Hey Adelcrap, read my signature.

adelcrow wrote on Oct 14^th, 2013 at 1:27pm:

Hey did you all know that Joe Hockeys real family name is Hokeidonian and they are f@cking Palestinians. A bloody ignorant Arab reffo in charge of our money  ;D

adelcrow wrote on Mar 4^th, 2014 at 4:29pm:

Being of Palestinian descent Arab Joe is rubbing his hands together at the thought of selling Qantas to his Arab mates and painting a flying Camel on the tail of every plane.

adelcrow wrote on Mar 4^th, 2014 at 2:34pm:

Abbott has always known that his plan to turn Qantas into the Flying Camel was never going to get through this Senate or the next one so all he has done is washed his hands of the whole problem. Palestinian Joe....Answer this question "why is Grain Corp more important than Qantas?"

If people don't like a politician or political party then fine, I get that.

Feel free to openly criticise.

But on separate and many threads to consistently bring in the Arabic heritage of a politician where it is completely irrelevant is against this message board's rule on racism.

In fact, and I wasn't going to share this originally, before deciding to suspend Adelcrow for the latest set of remarks, I wondered if I was being unfair.
I asked a lad who works with me - originally from Cairo - if he had found them offensive.

He said several of the comments to him were offensive reading them as a young Arab man.

He didn't even know who Hockey was and wouldn't know a single thing about Australia or its politicians.

I feel perfectly comfortable to suspend Adelcrow for continuous racist comments which are not acceptable.
This rule has been applied to anyone - they too will face the same suspension if I see further racism in this manner.

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2013 at 3:36pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Nov 23rd, 2013 at 11:13am: adelcrow wrote on Nov 23rd, 2013 at 9:40am: http://www.aacca.com.au/wp-content/connection_images/Arab_Bank_Australia_logo.jpg Good one Joe...go back to Palestine with all the other reffos Link? You are becoming just like Maqqa? don't you thing such blatant racism deserves a suspension? I thought we didn't tolerate such stuff

A nasty pattern over a solid period of time of anti-Arabic racism attacking one politician.

Not acceptable anymore Adel, adjust your actions.

adelcrow wrote on Mar 6^th, 2014 at 6:12pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 5th, 2014 at 5:36am: Do not use racially derogatory remarks on the message board. This is a message I received from Andrei who as we all know is guilty of some of the most vile racist tirades on this forum over the years. I assume calling someone of Arab descent an Arab is now racist but calling Indian migrants shoe shine boys is not. I assume Freediver is going to give Andrei a boot in the arse and revoke his moderator status.

GLOBAL MODERATOR/PROPAGANDIST status don't you mean?

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2014 at 7:48pm:

This is on the rules page: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/forum-rules.html Racism Discussion of racism and race related political issues is encouraged. However, politically correct language should be used when making criticism of racial policies or groups. Racism will be judged in a similar way to pornography – that is, is the criticism necessary to get a point of view across, or is it a gratuitous attack on a racial group? Note that race is treated differently from religion, which is a matter of choice and is open to the same criticism as political ideology. From the limited investigationing I did, I agree with Andrei. You are welcome to repost the offending comments here for the purpose of discussion.

I therefore/hereby?!? posit that YOU ARE, INDEED, ANDREI!  :D

Banning Adelcrow is unfair. Most of us know that he was just fooling around. Andrei you might not realise it, but the racism you regularly display,  is equally if not more offensive to some of us. You might use more civilised words, but the intent is still there.

Same goes for George when he referred to a gay political figure as a poofter. He was given a warning. Has anyone bothered to pull up those from the right who torment Buzz constantly with their filthy comments about homosexuality?

Once you start exercising your "do as I say not as I do" here - there is going to be dissension.

Political figures can be made fun of. It's not as if Adelcrow or George were being personally abusive to members - they were making fun of politicians and their ilk which the RW's also do, but with impunity.

mantra wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 3:42am:

Banning Adelcrow is unfair. Most of us know that he was just fooling around. Andrei you might not realise it, but the racism you regularly display,  is equally if not more offensive to some of us. You might use more civilised words, but the intent is still there. Same goes for George when he referred to a gay political figure as a poofter. He was given a warning. Has anyone bothered to pull up those from the right who torment Buzz constantly with their filthy comments about homosexuality? Once you start exercising your "do as I say not as I do" here - there is going to be dissension. Political figures can be made fun of. It's not as if Adelcrow or George were being personally abusive to members - they were making fun of politicians and their ilk which the RW's also do, but with impunity.

you have a point ,mantra.. but as andrei said he did get warned...andrei is a MOD now..he too has to follow rules..and dispense them..

Joe btw was born in Sydney..

adel changed dramatically after the 7th...and has since got worse..[my opinion].

there are many MPs of ethnic heritage.how would it be if we all.. went mad and used it as  an insulting weapon...???.

do you really think the boards need lowering to that level.?.

well done andrei....it isnt ok to use the term ABO..for good reason.... people dont like it.at least this righty doesnt.

There is perhaps a bit too much name calling on this forum and that is probably what encourages people to make comments such as these.  It does seem at times that the some comments that should give reason for disciplinary action are allowed to remain on record, presumably without any action being taken.

On another note, I would question whether it is factually correct to refer to Joe Hockey as an Arab.  As I said elsewhere:
Frances wrote on Mar 6^th, 2014 at 6:38pm:

Given that only Hockey's paternal grandmother was Palestinian, wouldn't his heritage be more Armenian than Palestinian?  And I don't think you could call Armenians Arabs....

Andrei was right to suspend Adelcrow, I would have done the same.
Unfortunately I see the boards here once or twice a week at most, but from what I have seen, he seems to be doing a very good job modding here, which is a pain in the arse for free.

In my opinion, Andrei & FD are correct, the term is question is derogatory & racist.

And, again in my opinion, we could do with –
1)      A great deal less of this sort of approach, which is essentially seeking a Political edge/advantage, from ALL sides of Politics.
2)      A great deal less of Politicians & their “supporters”, concentrating on their own short term interests.
3)      A great deal more of Politicians & their “supporters”, concentrating on the Best long term interests of ALL Australians!


Cheers!

perceptions_now wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 8:13am:

In my opinion, Andrei & FD are correct, the term is question is derogatory & racist. And, again in my opinion, we could do with – 1)      A great deal less of this sort of approach, which is essentially seeking a Political edge/advantage, from ALL sides of Politics. 2)      A great deal less of Politicians & their “supporters”, concentrating on their own short term interests. 3)      A great deal more of Politicians & their “supporters”, concentrating on the Best long term interests of ALL Australians! Cheers!

disagree entirely perc...

you want to control peoples thinking that isnt correct at all..

LONG TERM INTERESTS what does that mean??..

hypotheticals??.. no thanks..

we all need to take on other peoples point of view....maybe over time we win a few over...who knows..

its the personal bits that infuriate me...like at this moment greenswin takes great delight in calling Abbott a murderer...

this is bound to bring out attacks from the other side...after all he didnt open MANUS AGAIN..

I dont come on here to be abused.. or to read abuse...but its all some people have got.. and maybe they need to be sent to the naughty board..one for abusers... who knows...

but you cannot tell people what they can or should discuss.....ye gods thats a form of brainwashing...

its only allowed if it suits the mods..

Maybe Andrei can explain how calling someone an Arab is more racist than calling them an Indian, Anglo or Native American. While Andrei is at he can also explain if he thinks calling an Indian  a shoe shine boy is racist! I bet he can't /won't. Come on Andrei! up until now you have been bi partisan but now the stench of hypocrisy has crept into your judgment. I expect an unconditional apology for all of your racist statements about blacks and other coloured people and I also expect you to ban yourself for a week, or shut the ... Up.
Maybe you other mods can explain your reasoning that calling someone an Arab! Who is of Arab decent is racist? Because by your reasoning calling someone an American, African, Australian or European is also racist, has the world gone mad?

mozzaok wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 7:59am:

Unfortunately I see the boards here once or twice a week at most, but from what I have seen, he seems to be doing a very good job modding here, which is a pain in the arse for free.

Andrei and Perceptions are doing a good job, but a polite critique occasionally shouldn't hurt anyone with an open mind.   :)

cods wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 8:41am:

perceptions_now wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 8:13am: In my opinion, Andrei & FD are correct, the term is question is derogatory & racist. And, again in my opinion, we could do with – 1)      A great deal less of this sort of approach, which is essentially seeking a Political edge/advantage, from ALL sides of Politics. 2)      A great deal less of Politicians & their “supporters”, concentrating on their own short term interests. 3)      A great deal more of Politicians & their “supporters”, concentrating on the Best long term interests of ALL Australians! Cheers! disagree entirely perc... you want to control peoples thinking that isnt correct at all.. LONG TERM INTERESTS what does that mean??.. hypotheticals??.. no thanks.. we all need to take on other peoples point of view....maybe over time we win a few over...who knows.. its the personal bits that infuriate me...like at this moment greenswin takes great delight in calling Abbott a murderer... this is bound to bring out attacks from the other side...after all he didnt open MANUS AGAIN.. I dont come on here to be abused.. or to read abuse...but its all some people have got.. and maybe they need to be sent to the naughty board..one for abusers... who knows... but you cannot tell people what they can or should discuss.....ye gods thats a form of brainwashing... its only allowed if it suits the mods..

So Cods, are you saying -
The term used against Joe Hockey, wasn't derogatory &/or racist?
We couldn't do with Politicians concentrating less on their own short term interests/graft/corruption?
We don't want Politicians to concentrate more on the Best long term interests of ALL Australians?

mantra wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 10:36am:

mozzaok wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 7:59am: Unfortunately I see the boards here once or twice a week at most, but from what I have seen, he seems to be doing a very good job modding here, which is a pain in the arse for free. Andrei and Perceptions are doing a good job, but a polite critique occasionally shouldn't hurt anyone with an open mind.   :)

Mantra,

You had your turn at administering a Forum (Menagerie?) that Deepthought set up for you. You failed miserably as an Admin/Mod because you continuously deleted or over-moderated posts, to the extent of actually altering posts to suit your POV.

Several people here can back me up on this.

I'd suggest, dear, that you keep your opinion about moderation to yourself.  You don't have a good record, or an unbiased, record.  In other words. CEASE AND DESIST, giving advice about Moderation on this Forum.

Thank You.

Neferti wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 3:13pm:

mantra wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 10:36am: mozzaok wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 7:59am: Unfortunately I see the boards here once or twice a week at most, but from what I have seen, he seems to be doing a very good job modding here, which is a pain in the arse for free. Andrei and Perceptions are doing a good job, but a polite critique occasionally shouldn't hurt anyone with an open mind.   :) Mantra, You had your turn at administering a Forum (Menagerie?) that Deepthought set up for you. You failed miserably as an Admin/Mod because you continuously deleted or over-moderated posts, to the extent of actually altering posts to suit your POV. Several people here can back me up on this. I'd suggest, dear, that you keep your opinion about moderation to yourself.  You don't have a good record, or an unbiased, record.  In other words. CEASE AND DESIST, giving advice about Moderation on this Forum. Thank You.

Or, in other words Mantra... Nef refuses to acknowledge your right to free speech and will say what ever she can to deny your free speech irrespective of whether you view this as a right you and Nef should enjoy.

This is what Arab Joe said about Qantas:

"I'm very concerned about any dilution of Australian control of Qantas..Our experience has been that when companies have majority foreign ownership or majority foreign control then it actually has an impact on the social responsibility."  - 16th December, 2009.

Arab Joe also said:

"There is a significant community benefit in having a national carrier." - 28th November, 2013.

Where is any racist comment or racist aspersion in those remarks?

The real problem here is that it was Andrei who waved the finger of scorn.  Inarguably, of all posters I read almost always, it is Andrei who produces the seriously gross racial slurs, some of which have already been referred to ^^^^.

perceptions_now wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 11:47am:

cods wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 8:41am: perceptions_now wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 8:13am: In my opinion, Andrei & FD are correct, the term is question is derogatory & racist. And, again in my opinion, we could do with – 1)      A great deal less of this sort of approach, which is essentially seeking a Political edge/advantage, from ALL sides of Politics. 2)      A great deal less of Politicians & their “supporters”, concentrating on their own short term interests. 3)      A great deal more of Politicians & their “supporters”, concentrating on the Best long term interests of ALL Australians! Cheers! disagree entirely perc... you want to control peoples thinking that isnt correct at all.. LONG TERM INTERESTS what does that mean??.. hypotheticals??.. no thanks.. we all need to take on other peoples point of view....maybe over time we win a few over...who knows.. its the personal bits that infuriate me...like at this moment greenswin takes great delight in calling Abbott a murderer... this is bound to bring out attacks from the other side...after all he didnt open MANUS AGAIN.. I dont come on here to be abused.. or to read abuse...but its all some people have got.. and maybe they need to be sent to the naughty board..one for abusers... who knows... but you cannot tell people what they can or should discuss.....ye gods thats a form of brainwashing... its only allowed if it suits the mods.. So Cods, are you saying - The term used against Joe Hockey, wasn't derogatory &/or racist? We couldn't do with Politicians concentrating less on their own short term interests/graft/corruption? We don't want Politicians to concentrate more on the Best long term interests of ALL Australians?

YOU SAID AND I QUOTE......POLITICIANS AND THEIR "SUPPORTERS"


maybe I have misunderstood...


can you tell ,me where???


you seem to think that this forum has divine power to make MPs change their mind or think like the forum members with the loudest voices do?????????????

you are on e strange dude I can tell..

no this is a forum for almost FREE SPEECH...as long as it isnt swearing and abuse... if its just opinions..

who the hell doesnt think they can change the word..

when they are on a political board..


for goodness sake perc you sound like a few others on here.. if they are disagreed with..



So Cods, are you saying -
The term used against Joe Hockey, wasn't derogatory &/or racist?


no I didnt comment on that just your 1/2/3...questioning..

my comments on Joe and his background are in my previous post......

we do not pick our parentage...none of us do..

its stupid and rude to keep repeating like a  parrot the same thing over and over..get a life and grow up..

and as I have already said.. I am on andreis side..if someone cannot see how childish their behaviour is on an adult forum.. then they have to be shown do they not?? ::) ::)

the naughty corner may do it..

Aussie wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 4:05pm:

This is what Arab Joe said about Qantas: "I'm very concerned about any dilution of Australian control of Qantas..Our experience has been that when companies have majority foreign ownership or majority foreign control then it actually has an impact on the social responsibility."  - 16th December, 2009. Arab Joe also said: "There is a significant community benefit in having a national carrier." - 28th November, 2013. Where is any racist comment or racist aspersion in those remarks? The real problem here is that it was Andrei who waved the finger of scorn.  Inarguably, of all posters I read almost always, it is Andrei who produces the seriously gross racial slurs, some of which have already been referred to ^^^^.

You luvvie clowns are hilarious with your double standards and hypocrisy.  Pity you are not as smart as you assume that you must be.

If someone mentions a muslim or aboriginal say committing a crime, you idiots are breaking your fingernails speed typing "what does religion/race/ethnicity have to do with it?".

But happily now religion, race or ancestry is able to be mentioned in an incidental way and the luvvie "who me?  farted?" gormless expression disavowing any ulterior intent as demonstrated here can be used as precedent.

Thanks Aussie.  You are one gun taxi driving lawyer.   8-)

Sappho wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 3:29pm:

Or, in other words Mantra... Nef refuses to acknowledge your right to free speech and will say what ever she can to deny your free speech irrespective of whether you view this as a right you and Nef should enjoy.

Neferti is one of the nastiest people on the net and a troll of the highest order and yes Sappho - he doesn't believe that I should have any free speech whatsoever, although he enjoys his defamatory and insulting free speech regardless of the harm he causes to people and the nasty gossip he spreads. He's better suited to PA where he can denigrate the Ozpolitic members to his heart's content without moderation. In fact I wonder why he even bothers joining political forums. He couldn't make a political post if his life depended on it.

Neferti wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 3:13pm:

You failed miserably as an Admin/Mod because you continuously deleted or over-moderated posts, to the extent of actually altering posts to suit your POV. Several people here can back me up on this.

Let these several people here come forward then or else retract your lies.

mantra wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 4:46pm:

Sappho wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 3:29pm: Or, in other words Mantra... Nef refuses to acknowledge your right to free speech and will say what ever she can to deny your free speech irrespective of whether you view this as a right you and Nef should enjoy. Neferti is one of the nastiest people on the net and a troll of the highest order and yes Sappho - he doesn't believe that I should have any free speech whatsoever, although he enjoys his defamatory and insulting free speech regardless of the harm he causes to people and the nasty gossip he spreads. He's better suited to PA where he can denigrate the Ozpolitic members to his heart's content without moderation. In fact I wonder why he even bothers joining political forums. He couldn't make a political post if his life depended on it.

Can't disagree with you there Mantra.... and I speak from experience of having read the Banshee.

I am the one and only Sappho ol' Mantra... I know the history.

How have you been btw... it's been a while.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 6^th, 2014 at 11:43pm:

adelcrow wrote on Oct 14th, 2013 at 1:27pm: Hey did you all know that Joe Hockeys real family name is Hokeidonian and they are f@cking Palestinians. A bloody ignorant Arab reffo in charge of our money  ;D

I'm sorry but anyone who can't see this post for what it is, needs to look a little harder.
Impossible to defend.

Continually bringing Arab ethnicity into any argument.
It's just gratuitous racism and wrong.

Sappho wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 5:07pm:

Can't disagree with you there Mantra.... and I speak from experience of having read the Banshee. I am the one and only Sappho ol' Mantra... I know the history. How have you been btw... it's been a while.

I know you know the history Sappho. You've seen it all too, including the obscenities and slander. It's nice to see you back from your travels. Hope you had a great time.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 5:08pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 6th, 2014 at 11:43pm: adelcrow wrote on Oct 14th, 2013 at 1:27pm: Hey did you all know that Joe Hockeys real family name is Hokeidonian and they are f@cking Palestinians. A bloody ignorant Arab reffo in charge of our money  ;D I'm sorry but anyone who can't see this post for what it is, needs to look a little harder. Impossible to defend. Continually bringing Arab ethnicity into any argument. It's just gratuitous racism and wrong.

Yeas....that is an extreme example, Andrei.  What say ye about my example above ^^^^^^?

What say ye about the 100% terribly racist stuff you have posted?

mantra wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 5:11pm:

Sappho wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 5:07pm: Can't disagree with you there Mantra.... and I speak from experience of having read the Banshee. I am the one and only Sappho ol' Mantra... I know the history. How have you been btw... it's been a while. I know you know the history Sappho. You've seen it all too, including the obscenities and slander. It's nice to see you back from your travels. Hope you had a great time.

Just stopping by Oz for a bit of down time lovely lady. Been having a blast working in India as a cultural awareness manager at a New Delhi Call Centre... It's been great! 

Am thinking of bumming around China or Japan teaching English next. :)

Sappho wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 5:24pm:

Just stopping by Oz for a bit of down time lovely lady. Been having a blast working in India as a cultural awareness manager at a New Delhi Call Centre... It's been great! Am thinking of bumming around China or Japan teaching English next.

Sounds fantastic Sappho. Australia is going to seem dull in comparison. After being on the move for so long - it would be hard to settle down to a routine now.

Aussie wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 5:15pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 5:08pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 6th, 2014 at 11:43pm: adelcrow wrote on Oct 14th, 2013 at 1:27pm: Hey did you all know that Joe Hockeys real family name is Hokeidonian and they are f@cking Palestinians. A bloody ignorant Arab reffo in charge of our money  ;D I'm sorry but anyone who can't see this post for what it is, needs to look a little harder. Impossible to defend. Continually bringing Arab ethnicity into any argument. It's just gratuitous racism and wrong. Yeas....that is an extreme example, Andrei.  What say ye about my example above ^^^^^^? What say ye about the 100% terribly racist stuff you have posted?

"An extreme example"??

Is it gratuitous racism or not?

He's made numerous like this.

mantra wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 5:42pm:

Sappho wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 5:24pm: Just stopping by Oz for a bit of down time lovely lady. Been having a blast working in India as a cultural awareness manager at a New Delhi Call Centre... It's been great! Am thinking of bumming around China or Japan teaching English next. Sounds fantastic Sappho. Australia is going to seem dull in comparison. After being on the move for so long - it would be hard to settle down to a routine now.

I'll be honest Mantra... I returned with my kids after a big fat Indian Wedding... My dear friends youngest son and my son's best friend... and OMG It was like a culture shock... Where are all the people? Why have so much space for cars? I'd forgotten how clean it was here... People are sooooo rude in Oz... Why is that? Epic lol at the bitchin at queues... Aussies have no idea what a real wait in a queue is like. But the big thing I'm struggling with is the lack of freedoms... I feel a bit like I'm not my own person anymore with everyone tell me to do this and that, but when I ask why... no one knows except that 'it's the law' or 'cause you have to' Pfft Pluck that.

Meanwhile, this was my daughters first time in India and she too was in Culture shock... so dirty... so poor... so few rules to protect people from themselves... and she was treated like a princess because her white skin added prestige to the wedding... she found that uncomfortable too.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 5:48pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 5:15pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 5:08pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 6th, 2014 at 11:43pm: adelcrow wrote on Oct 14th, 2013 at 1:27pm: Hey did you all know that Joe Hockeys real family name is Hokeidonian and they are f@cking Palestinians. A bloody ignorant Arab reffo in charge of our money  ;D I'm sorry but anyone who can't see this post for what it is, needs to look a little harder. Impossible to defend. Continually bringing Arab ethnicity into any argument. It's just gratuitous racism and wrong. Yeas....that is an extreme example, Andrei.  What say ye about my example above ^^^^^^? What say ye about the 100% terribly racist stuff you have posted? "An extreme example"?? Is it gratuitous racism or not? He's made numerous like this.

No more than you have, and that is the problem you are not addressing.  It might be right that Mr Crow be called out, but you are the very last person (Moderator or otherwise) to do so without demonstrating the very worst kind of hypocrisy I have ever seen, given your many disgracefully racist posts.

(Of course, everyone will have noticed how you have ignored my other comments.)

I was going to stay out of this, hoping my point could be made without using a sledge hammer.  Shame you could not take the obvious hint, Andrei.

mozzaok wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 7:59am:

Andrei was right to suspend Adelcrow, I would have done the same.

That's good enough for me.
Mozza down the years was a good moderator. If he agrees I tend to find it's the right decision.

In fact I suspend often as a last resort.

As I said I asked a bloke here from Egypt if he found it offensive as an Arab.

He found the comments bringing in camels, telling him he's a reffo who should go home and that he shouldn't be in charge of treasury because he's Arab all offensive.

The comments are made because of heritage and completely unnecessary.
Think - did he make comments on Penny Wong based on her being Asian?
Why not? It would be equally unacceptable.

Calling him "Arab Joe" is not worth suspension. It probably says more about the intellect and manners of the poster using it. However the unpalatable comments on his heritage, camels, reffos etc.
Nope I won't have it.

Goes for everyone.

Sappho wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 5:50pm:

I'll be honest Mantra... I returned with my kids after a big fat Indian Wedding... My dear friends youngest son and my son's best friend... and OMG It was like a culture shock... Where are all the people? Why have so much space for cars? I'd forgotten how clean it was here... People are sooooo rude in Oz... Why is that? Epic lol at the bitchin at queues... Aussies have no idea what a real wait in a queue is like. But the big thing I'm struggling with is the lack of freedoms... I feel a bit like I'm not my own person anymore with everyone tell me to do this and that, but when I ask why... no one knows except that 'it's the law' or 'cause you have to' Pfft Pluck that. Meanwhile, this was my daughters first time in India and she too was in Culture shock... so dirty... so poor... so few rules to protect people from themselves... and she was treated like a princess because her white skin added prestige to the wedding... she found that uncomfortable too.

The Indian people are renowned for their happy dispositions regardless of their impoverished surroundings. What makes them so cheerful when we seem to be the opposite? There are a lot of very rude people around. Perhaps we have too much and take it for granted, although give it another year or so under this government and we'll be competing with third world countries, not only for jobs, but dwindling services too. It is going to become a race to the bottom.

Indian women are generally beautiful and attending a wedding would be an experience within itself. Where does the average family find the money to fund such an extravagance?

A leftie was banned. Well I never!!! ;D ;D ;D

For the record, I support Andrei's action.  Sorry, I've been a bit busy of late.

There is too much racism on here.

There is a lot of racism here and lefties generally aren't racist. I think Adelcrow was just stirring the pot for effect to get his own back on some of the negative comments directed at the left. He is a good contributor generally and it would be a pity to see him banned permanently.

muso wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 8:49pm:

For the record, I support Andrei's action.  Sorry, I've been a bit busy of late. There is too much racism on here.

I don't support Andrei on this matter at all.  If you had taken the ban action, I'd agree.  But Andrei, bitching about racism, and being supported by you blokes is just too obvious clubby trash.

The most precise laser like racist posts made on this Forum are from Andrei.  That is the problem with the action apparently taken by Andrei to ban a Member on that ground.  Dunno about anyone else, but I'll happily stand against that gross hypocrisy, no matter where it comes from.

Looks like you are the odd man out again, Aussie.

Not unusual for you when it comes to moral judgements.

Adelcrow was the most noxious poster on this site, its a wonder he wasnt banned earlier but telling in those that stick up for him. The left love an abuser but scream like girls if it gets directed back at them, as evidenced by the old screeched Aussie.

He's not permanently banned.

He received suspension for gratuitous racism, he will receive further suspensions for reoccurrence.
As will anybody else.

The choice is his.

As for the argument that suspension decisions should not be decided on based on the post but who bans them.... Well we can just leave that to be as ridiculous as it reads.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 5:08pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 6th, 2014 at 11:43pm: adelcrow wrote on Oct 14th, 2013 at 1:27pm: Hey did you all know that Joe Hockeys real family name is Hokeidonian and they are f@cking Palestinians. A bloody ignorant Arab reffo in charge of our money  ;D I'm sorry but anyone who can't see this post for what it is, needs to look a little harder. Impossible to defend. Continually bringing Arab ethnicity into any argument. It's just gratuitous racism and wrong.

Really? I hate racism and have often scalded you for yours, but get real.
Is Adel having a gov at Joe? Yea
Is he taking the piss? Yea
Is he even going to the extent that half the loony right do every day to take the piss? Yea.
Let's break it down, is Joes real name Hokeidonian? Yep fact.
Is he of Palistinian decent? Yep fact.
Is he of Arab heritage?yep fact.
Is he an ignorant git in charge of Australia's gov finances? Yep fact.
So what did he do wrong?
Ban him for swearing,fair enough, but the rest of your argument is bull.

Adelcrow was being a racist. End of story.

You should be berating him for exposing the shallowness of the left...or is it not racism, and just joking when 'the left' does it?

Sook wrote on Mar 7^th, 2014 at 11:52pm:

Adelcrow was being a racist. End of story. You should be berating him for exposing the shallowness of the left...or is it not racism, and just joking when 'the left' does it?

Oh nice. Berated by a banned member using yet another sock. ::)t ::)  thanks for the troll, IQ, how many socks of yours have you used now to troll me? Must be in the 20s?

skippy. wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 12:01am:

Sook wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 11:52pm: Adelcrow was being a racist. End of story. You should be berating him for exposing the shallowness of the left...or is it not racism, and just joking when 'the left' does it? Oh nice. Berated by a banned member using yet another sock. ::)t ::)  thanks for the troll, IQ, how many socks of yours have you used now to troll me? Must be in the 20s?

You should take the advice instead of deflecting for a change. It might do yo good considering you are nearly as abusive as Adel.

It's a shame the leftys feel that they are able to be abusive with impunity. I think it says more about this site, the previous moderators and who awarded them that position that an even handed mod gets blasted by the extreme leftys for reining in one of their own. It's like a shock to their system.

skippy. wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 12:01am:

Sook wrote on Mar 7th, 2014 at 11:52pm: Adelcrow was being a racist. End of story. You should be berating him for exposing the shallowness of the left...or is it not racism, and just joking when 'the left' does it? Oh nice. Berated by a banned member using yet another sock. ::)t ::)  thanks for the troll, IQ, how many socks of yours have you used now to troll me? Must be in the 20s?

He's bored Skippy. He's run out of lefties to abuse on PA - so has come over here to cause trouble. He'll lose it by the end of the day and be gone again.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 6^th, 2014 at 11:43pm:

adelcrow wrote on Oct 14th, 2013 at 1:27pm: Hey did you all know that Joe Hockeys real family name is Hokeidonian and they are f@cking Palestinians. A bloody ignorant Arab reffo in charge of our money  ;D

That sounds Armenian.

Yes, his grandparents came from Armenia. His father was an Armenian born in Bethlehem and his mother was Australian. He was born in  North Sydney and was educated at St Aloysius' College, Milson's Point and the University of Sydney.

I don't even know where the "Arab" snipe came from.

Hockey's paternal grandmother was Palestinian.  How that by itself justifies calling him an Arab is beyond me....

muso wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:25am:

Yes, his grandparents came from Armenia. His father was an Armenian born in Bethlehem and his mother was Australian. He was born in  North Sydney and was educated at St Aloysius' College, Milson's Point and the University of Sydney. I don't even know where the "Arab" snipe came from.

Oh so Adel got banned for calling someone Palestinian instead of Armenian! oh that makes much more sense! What the....

Frances wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:33am:

Hockey's paternal grandmother was Palestinian.  How that by itself justifies calling him an Arab is beyond me....

Maybe it's the same as calling someone aboriginal or Irish if their paternal grandparent was. ::)

Are you lot for real? Since when has it been a crime to call someone an Arab? Are to refrain from calling people Asians too? ::)

skippy. wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:35am:

Oh so Adel got banned for calling someone Palestinian instead of Armenian! oh that makes much more sense! What the....

It looks as though it all comes down to how you phrase it. If Adelcrow had said Joe is a descendant of the Arabic Palestinians who are fighting for their freedom from a cruel Jewish colonisation - then his comments would have been perfectly acceptable.

As long as you are politically correct - then it doesn't matter what you say. Adelcrow will no doubt be more careful next time.


freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2014 at 7:48pm:

This is on the rules page: Racism Discussion of racism and race related political issues is encouraged. However, politically correct language should be used when making criticism of racial policies or groups. Racism will be judged in a similar way to pornography – that is, is the criticism necessary to get a point of view across, or is it a gratuitous attack on a racial group? Note that race is treated differently from religion, which is a matter of choice and is open to the same criticism as political ideology. From the limited investigationing I did, I agree with Andrei. You are welcome to repost the offending comments here for the purpose of discussion.

skippy. wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:38am:

Are you lot for real? Since when has it been a crime to call someone an Arab? Are to refrain from calling people Asians too? ::)

Or, perish the thought, boers  ;D

mantra wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:49am:

skippy. wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 8:35am: Oh so Adel got banned for calling someone Palestinian instead of Armenian! oh that makes much more sense! What the.... It looks as though it all comes down to how you phrase it. If Adelcrow had said Joe is a descendant of the Arabic Palestinians who are fighting for their freedom from a cruel Jewish colonisation - then his comments would have been perfectly acceptable. As long as you are politically correct - then it doesn't matter what you say. Adelcrow will no doubt be more careful next time. freediver wrote on Mar 6th, 2014 at 7:48pm: This is on the rules page: Racism Discussion of racism and race related political issues is encouraged. However, politically correct language should be used when making criticism of racial policies or groups. Racism will be judged in a similar way to pornography – that is, is the criticism necessary to get a point of view across, or is it a gratuitous attack on a racial group? Note that race is treated differently from religion, which is a matter of choice and is open to the same criticism as political ideology. From the limited investigationing I did, I agree with Andrei. You are welcome to repost the offending comments here for the purpose of discussion.

So it's okeley dokeley to call people human garbage, that is it would be politically correct to call them this, so long as the issue of their race is not brought up?????  :-?

Needless to say, 'racism' can express a legitimate concern that need not be judged immoral and indefensible when viewed from certain perspectives.

When a different race of people come flooding into your neighbourhood via the immigration bandwagon, you can be quite certain they have a shared affinity with one another that is based solely on their racial background.

But this luxury is not allowed those of Anglo-Saxon-European background. It's evil and nasty for white-types to wish to be surrounded by those who resemble themselves racially. To express such a bias is deemed by the luvvies to be morally reprehensible and 'White Supremacist'. 

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 9:31am:

Needless to say, 'racism' can express a legitimate concern that need not be judged immoral and indefensible when viewed from certain perspectives. When a different race of people come flooding into your neighbourhood via the immigration bandwagon, you can be quite certain they have a shared affinity with one another that is based solely on their racial background. But this luxury is not allowed those of Anglo-Saxon-European background. It's evil and nasty for white-types to wish to be surrounded by those who resemble themselves racially. To express such a bias is deemed by the luvvies to be morally reprehensible and 'White Supremacist'.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ6hkkMle1Q

Mantra:


Quote:

Banning Adelcrow is unfair. Most of us know that he was just fooling around. Andrei you might not realise it, but the racism you regularly display,  is equally if not more offensive to some of us. You might use more civilised words, but the intent is still there.

From the rules:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/forum-rules.html

Racism

Discussion of racism and race related political issues is encouraged. However, politically correct language should be used when making criticism of racial policies or groups. Racism will be judged in a similar way to pornography – that is, is the criticism necessary to get a point of view across, or is it a gratuitous attack on a racial group? Note that race is treated differently from religion, which is a matter of choice and is open to the same criticism as political ideology.

freediver wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 10:12am:

Mantra: Quote: Banning Adelcrow is unfair. Most of us know that he was just fooling around. Andrei you might not realise it, but the racism you regularly display,  is equally if not more offensive to some of us. You might use more civilised words, but the intent is still there. From the rules: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/forum-rules.html Racism Discussion of racism and race related political issues is encouraged. However, politically correct language should be used when making criticism of racial policies or groups. Racism will be judged in a similar way to pornography – that is, is the criticism necessary to get a point of view across, or is it a gratuitous attack on a racial group? Note that race is treated differently from religion, which is a matter of choice and is open to the same criticism as political ideology.

I agree with this rule and remembered eventually why it was put in place, although feel some compassion for those members who don't understand the irony behind it. There is a huge loophole which can be exploited if you have the vocabulary.

You have to protect your forums and this is the only way to do it, although I believe Abbott is trying to alter the racial hatred act again to bring it back into line with the undermining changes Howard made and Labor subsequently amended.


Quote:

The prime minister’s election promise to repeal section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act could be in doubt following comments from the head of the government’s Indigenous Advisory Council, Warren Mundine, that the council was “not happy” about the removal of the section. This means the section may be modified rather than repealed. Human rights organisations, ethnic groups, think tanks, government agencies and NGOs have all weighed in on the debate, and all seem to agree on two things; freedom of speech is important, but stopping racism and racially motivated attacks is also important. A person can be considered to have breached the section if their actions are “reasonably likely … to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate”. The difference in views lies in how far these organisations believe the state should be able to restrict speech, and has led to some unexpected alliances. Abbott’s election promise to repeal section 18C came after Andrew Bolt was found to have breached the act for a column he wrote about Indigenous Australians. The column implied light-skinned Indigenous people identified as such for personal gain. A federal court judge found the articles were not written in good faith and contained a series of factual errors. Bolt and his supporters argue the section should be repealed because it interferes too greatly with speech that could be offensive or insulting. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/07/pm-may-soften-stance-on-racial-discrimination-act

The point of the rule is to permit the expression of racist views and to encourage free debate about race, while filtering out the drunk bogans who are just here to insult people.

freediver wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 10:44am:

The point of the rule is to permit the expression of racist views and to encourage free debate about race, while filtering out the drunk bogans who are just here to insult people.

Seriously, you're going to defend andreis use of the term 'human garbage' whilst shanking the rest of us with the terminology approximate to 'chavs'  :D

      'Bogan culture takes a lot of New Zealand culture characteristics. It's almost like New Zealand culture in a concentrated form.' 

Making no sense at all seems to work as an alternative strategy to political correctness.

freediver wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 10:44am:

The point of the rule is to permit the expression of racist views and to encourage free debate about race, while filtering out the drunk bogans who are just here to insult people.

Well said.

There's been far too much paranoid victimhood posturing among the black communities both here and in the UK. It's got to the point where the police are reluctant to arrest dark skinned people because of the inevitable outcries of 'racism!'

skippy. wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:38am:

Are you lot for real? Since when has it been a crime to call someone an Arab? Are to refrain from calling people Asians too? ::)

Foul racists insisting racists should be allowed to be racist bastards. Nice.

freediver wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 11:00am:

Making no sense at all seems to work as an alternative strategy to political correctness.

What is the difference between satire and sarcasm?

You're above no ones station buddy!  8-)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 11:33am:

freediver wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:00am: Making no sense at all seems to work as an alternative strategy to political correctness. What is the difference between satire and sarcasm? You're above no ones station buddy!  8-)

What did your parents do to you to make you turn out like this?

Sook wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 11:54am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:33am: freediver wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:00am: Making no sense at all seems to work as an alternative strategy to political correctness. What is the difference between satire and sarcasm? You're above no ones station buddy!  8-) What did your parents do to you to make you turn out like this?

From an early age they stopped him reading The Australian.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 12:12pm:

Sook wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:54am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:33am: freediver wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:00am: Making no sense at all seems to work as an alternative strategy to political correctness. What is the difference between satire and sarcasm? You're above no ones station buddy!  8-) What did your parents do to you to make you turn out like this? From an early age they stopped him reading The Australian.

I think they must have sodomised him with it.

Sook wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 11:54am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:33am: freediver wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:00am: Making no sense at all seems to work as an alternative strategy to political correctness. What is the difference between satire and sarcasm? You're above no ones station buddy!  8-) What did your parents do to you to make you turn out like this?

I've smoked crack with the liberal voters mate so you aint no mystery  ;)

Sook wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 12:33pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 12:12pm: Sook wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:54am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:33am: freediver wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:00am: Making no sense at all seems to work as an alternative strategy to political correctness. What is the difference between satire and sarcasm? You're above no ones station buddy!  8-) What did your parents do to you to make you turn out like this? From an early age they stopped him reading The Australian. I think they must have sodomised him with it.

Too much crack buddy if ya thinking about stuff like that the whole of the internet collectively laughs out loud  ;D :-? :-?

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 12:56pm:

Sook wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 12:33pm: Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 12:12pm: Sook wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:54am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:33am: freediver wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:00am: Making no sense at all seems to work as an alternative strategy to political correctness. What is the difference between satire and sarcasm? You're above no ones station buddy!  8-) What did your parents do to you to make you turn out like this? From an early age they stopped him reading The Australian. I think they must have sodomised him with it. Too much crack buddy if ya thinking about stuff like that the whole of the internet collectively laughs out loud  ;D :-? :-?

Liberal voters don't smoke crack, we do cocaine in its natural form. We find its more sociable and high falluting. It's you Labor/Greens voters that love your cheap crack and all its paranoia, skin picking glory. After all, its all you can afford.

Sook wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 1:01pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 12:56pm: Sook wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 12:33pm: Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 12:12pm: Sook wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:54am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:33am: freediver wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 11:00am: Making no sense at all seems to work as an alternative strategy to political correctness. What is the difference between satire and sarcasm? You're above no ones station buddy!  8-) What did your parents do to you to make you turn out like this? From an early age they stopped him reading The Australian. I think they must have sodomised him with it. Too much crack buddy if ya thinking about stuff like that the whole of the internet collectively laughs out loud  ;D :-? :-? Liberal voters don't smoke crack, we do cocaine in its natural form. We find its more sociable and high falluting. It's you Labor/Greens voters that love your cheap crack and all its paranoia, skin picking glory. After all, its all you can afford.

When i said before the whole internet was laughing at you it was because you know its true and can't function online knowing we all know you know that we know  ;D ::) ::)

You must have pulled quite a hit from you glass pipe before you wrote that. How's the bugs under the skin working for you?

Sook wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 1:15pm:

You must have pulled quite a hit from you glass pipe before you wrote that. How's the bugs under the skin working for you?

Who the bugger smokes that boring shite  ;D ??? Purely for incessant coin counters and other bored souls!

How long is the permanently banned member Sooky aka IQISLOW going to be allowed to stay here this time around? He's got no debating skills and is trying to lower the standard of debate to his usual level by using personal attack as his weapon of choice.

mantra wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:17pm:

How long is the permanently banned member Sooky aka IQISLOW going to be allowed to stay here this time around? He's got no debating skills and is trying to lower the standard of debate to his level as usual by using personal attack as his weapon of choice.

I agree.

A couple of *biffo* posts between two squabblers in a threat I think is acceptable, but when it turns into a serial, with post after post being nothing more than one-liner insults to outdo each other, then you've really got to wonder why you bother.

mantra wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:17pm:

How long is the permanently banned member Sooky aka IQISLOW going to be allowed to stay here this time around? He's got no debating skills and is trying to lower the standard of debate to his usual level by using personal attack as his weapon of choice.

He is part of the 'lets buy all the worlds internet address space to deny climate change and give our rich gods time to retool for the new paradigm' brigade... i would be unsure as to why he was ever made redundant!

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:22pm:

mantra wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 2:17pm: How long is the permanently banned member Sooky aka IQISLOW going to be allowed to stay here this time around? He's got no debating skills and is trying to lower the standard of debate to his level as usual by using personal attack as his weapon of choice. I agree. A couple of *biffo* posts between two squabblers in a threat I think is acceptable, but when it turns into a serial, with post after post being nothing more than one-liner insults to outdo each other, then you've really got to wonder why you bother.

I just can't help it sorry!  8-) 8-)

Meanwhile ... here's a clear case of 'racism' being championed under another name.


Quote:

Victorian Liberal backbencher Sharman Stone has suggested her colleagues should look to Labor for ideas about how to get more women into politics. "I'm beginning to think very seriously that really, the Liberal Party, we have to do more," Dr Stone told AM. The Labor Party has long had a quota system in place, although it is yet to achieve its target of getting women into 40 per cent of its seats. The Liberal Party is opposed to the Labor model of quotas, arguing candidates should be preselected on merit rather than gender.

Quota systems are the death of democracy.

Why do we need 'more women in politics' ~ ? It can only mean that women think in a different way to men in politics, and therefore government needs this female alternative view.

It's nonsense.

It's tantamount to demanding quotas on the basis of sexuality, religion, colour, vegetarianism, cultural background, cat-lovers, dog-lovers, generation, age, etc

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:29pm:

Quota systems are the death of democracy. Why do we need 'more women in politics' ~ ? It can only mean that women think in a different way to men in politics, and therefore government needs this female alternative view. It's nonsense. It's tantamount to demanding quotas on the basis of sexuality, religion, colour, vegetarianism, cultural background, cat-lovers, dog-lovers, generation, age, etc

It would look better for the Abbott administration to have a few more female ministers to at least represent female issues. It's a very one sided government at present run by a group of stodgy older males who are set in their ultra conservative ways.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:29pm:

Meanwhile ... here's a clear case of 'racism' being championed under another name. Quote: Victorian Liberal backbencher Sharman Stone has suggested her colleagues should look to Labor for ideas about how to get more women into politics. "I'm beginning to think very seriously that really, the Liberal Party, we have to do more," Dr Stone told AM. The Labor Party has long had a quota system in place, although it is yet to achieve its target of getting women into 40 per cent of its seats. The Liberal Party is opposed to the Labor model of quotas, arguing candidates should be preselected on merit rather than gender. Quota systems are the death of democracy.

I agree.

Why have conservative parties?

We should have nothing but progressive, left wing parties competing in all elections.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:56pm:

I agree. Why have conservative parties? We should have nothing but progressive, left wing parties competing in all elections.

Exactly.

All composed of coloured lesbians in wheelchairs who have adopted twin-daughters named 'Oprah' and 'Whoopie'.

mantra wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:48pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 2:29pm: Quota systems are the death of democracy. Why do we need 'more women in politics' ~ ? It can only mean that women think in a different way to men in politics, and therefore government needs this female alternative view. It's nonsense. It's tantamount to demanding quotas on the basis of sexuality, religion, colour, vegetarianism, cultural background, cat-lovers, dog-lovers, generation, age, etc It would look better for the Abbott administration to have a few more female ministers to at least represent female issues. It's a very one sided government at present run by a group of stodgy older males who are set in their ultra conservative ways.

Quota or not it speaks!

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:29pm:

Meanwhile ... here's a clear case of 'racism' being championed under another name. Quote: Victorian Liberal backbencher Sharman Stone has suggested her colleagues should look to Labor for ideas about how to get more women into politics. "I'm beginning to think very seriously that really, the Liberal Party, we have to do more," Dr Stone told AM. The Labor Party has long had a quota system in place, although it is yet to achieve its target of getting women into 40 per cent of its seats. The Liberal Party is opposed to the Labor model of quotas, arguing candidates should be preselected on merit rather than gender. Quota systems are the death of democracy. Why do we need 'more women in politics' ~ ? It can only mean that women think in a different way to men in politics, and therefore government needs this female alternative view. It's nonsense. It's tantamount to demanding quotas on the basis of sexuality, religion, colour, vegetarianism, cultural background, cat-lovers, dog-lovers, generation, age, etc

The quotas for women is quite funny. Those pushing for it are doing it for 'diversity' purposes, but admitting that there's biological determinism at play in sexual differences. It's even more funny because these "progressives" believe biological determinism is a myth and that sexual differences are a social construct.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 6:09pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 2:29pm: Meanwhile ... here's a clear case of 'racism' being championed under another name. Quote: Victorian Liberal backbencher Sharman Stone has suggested her colleagues should look to Labor for ideas about how to get more women into politics. "I'm beginning to think very seriously that really, the Liberal Party, we have to do more," Dr Stone told AM. The Labor Party has long had a quota system in place, although it is yet to achieve its target of getting women into 40 per cent of its seats. The Liberal Party is opposed to the Labor model of quotas, arguing candidates should be preselected on merit rather than gender. Quota systems are the death of democracy. Why do we need 'more women in politics' ~ ? It can only mean that women think in a different way to men in politics, and therefore government needs this female alternative view. It's nonsense. It's tantamount to demanding quotas on the basis of sexuality, religion, colour, vegetarianism, cultural background, cat-lovers, dog-lovers, generation, age, etc The quotas for women is quite funny. Those pushing for it are doing it for 'diversity' purposes, but admitting that there's biological determinism at play in sexual differences. It's even more funny because these "progressives" believe biological determinism is a myth and that sexual differences are a social construct.

Lol are you sure about all that?!!!!!

If you can assimilate into any culture, regardless of your own cultural inclinations and standards and racial characteristics and identity, you have proved racism utterly baseless.

If cannot, you haven't.

That little suffix, -ism, makes the whole issue much more loaded than it should be, or is. Aborigines wishing to preserve their unique characteristics are utterly racists - except no tinted person be guilty of wanting to preserve cultural and racial characteristics. But every instance of Aboriginal cultural preservation would be labelled racists if it was done by non-Aboriginese, especially Europeans.
Racism is often (not always) a word used by people with a secret shame about their historical inferiority. It has been appropriated by the lazy and degraded and inferior and downright lumpen as an excuse and a diversion.

There is such a thing as hierarchy.

"Racisms' is used to overcome and wipe away the evidence of hierarchy of persons, cultures, values, behaviours, norms, historical worth, personal worth, collective worth - and yes, insofar as they map onto races, races.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:29pm:

Quota systems are the death of democracy.

Group Preferences: Opiate of the Intellectuals


Quotas are intrinsically divisive and discriminatory (in the worst possible sense) because the number of categories into which humanity can be divided is infinite: only some categories, therefore, can be favoured, leaving others resentful and liable to seek political redress as their supposed salvation. Quotas therefore not only politicise life but embitter political life itself. They formalise favouritism, thus reinforcing the very problem they are meant to solve.

They necessarily inflate the role of government, for someone has to enforce them. Before long, the demand for equality (of a kind) undermines freedom because private associations are no longer able to make the rules they wish, a necessary condition for a truly liberal society in which government is not overweening or preponderant. The imposition of quotas is founded on the belief that everyone is a bigot unless forced by administrative fiat to be otherwise.
http://www.libertylawsite.org/2014/02/24/racial-preferences-opiate-of-the-intellectuals/

Soren wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:04pm:

If you can assimilate into any culture, regardless of your own cultural inclinations and standards and racial characteristics and identity, you have proved racism utterly baseless. If cannot, you haven't. That little suffix, -ism, makes the whole issue much more loaded than it should be, or is. Aborigines wishing to preserve their unique characteristics are utterly racists - except no tinted person be guilty of wanting to preserve cultural and racial characteristics. But every instance of Aboriginal cultural preservation would be labelled racists if it was done by non-Aboriginese, especially Europeans. Racism is often (not always) a word used by people with a secret shame about their historical inferiority. It has been appropriated by the lazy and degraded and inferior and downright lumpen as an excuse and a diversion. There is such a thing as hierarchy. "Racisms' is used to overcome and wipe away the evidence of hierarchy of persons, cultures, values, behaviours, norms, historical worth, personal worth, collective worth - and yes, insofar as they map onto races, races.

http://creativefan.com/important/cf/2012/02/smiley-face-clip-art/war-hero-smiley.jpg

Soren wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:08pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 2:29pm: Quota systems are the death of democracy. Group Preferences: Opiate of the Intellectuals Quotas are intrinsically divisive and discriminatory (in the worst possible sense) because the number of categories into which humanity can be divided is infinite: only some categories, therefore, can be favoured, leaving others resentful and liable to seek political redress as their supposed salvation. Quotas therefore not only politicise life but embitter political life itself. They formalise favouritism, thus reinforcing the very problem they are meant to solve. They necessarily inflate the role of government, for someone has to enforce them. Before long, the demand for equality (of a kind) undermines freedom because private associations are no longer able to make the rules they wish, a necessary condition for a truly liberal society in which government is not overweening or preponderant. The imposition of quotas is founded on the belief that everyone is a bigot unless forced by administrative fiat to be otherwise. http://www.libertylawsite.org/2014/02/24/racial-preferences-opiate-of-the-intellectuals/

Quota or not its still a bad look!

I'm happy to have women sitting in our parliament if they are the best people for the job, but otherwise I find it pathetic and offensive that women are being channelled into a career in government on the basis of their gender credentials.

The Labor party tried to put this Social-Marxist idea into practice, but couldn't reach their quota of 40 females. Who knows how many intelligent and politically savvy males were overlooked because of this vulgar and simplistic selection process.

(Death ~ if you follow this up with another of your serial one-liners I'm going to call up the spirits of my ancestors to have them haunt you).

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 4:57am:

I'm happy to have women sitting in our parliament if they are the best people for the job, but otherwise I find it pathetic and offensive that women are being channelled into a career in government on the basis of their gender credentials. The Labor party tried to put this Social-Marxist idea into practice, but couldn't reach their quota of 40 females. Who knows how many intelligent and politically savvy males were overlooked because of this vulgar and simplistic selection process. (Death ~ if you follow this up with another of your serial one-liners I'm going to call up the spirits of my ancestors to have them haunt you).

okeley dokeley,

System breaks down. You can't deny systematic oppression requires systematic upheaval, period!??

Or can you?

<your court!>

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 6:02am:

okeley dokeley,

Thanks, Death.

This subject of 'racism' is one of the most misunderstood of all the social issues.

It's even more misunderstood than the ideology of 'multiculturalism'.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 6:33am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 6:02am: okeley dokeley, Thanks, Death. This subject of 'racism' is one of the most misunderstood of all the social issues. It's even more misunderstood than the ideology of 'multiculturalism'.

Fair fair- its late. I was raised in New Guinea- my brother was born in New Guinea but it still buggers me.

It is a cancer and I'll come back to the conversation even tho I am guilty of transgression as a whitey in Australia at current.

Names can be so ugly but .. yeh I'll come back to it later!

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 3:00pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 2:56pm: I agree. Why have conservative parties? We should have nothing but progressive, left wing parties competing in all elections. Exactly. All composed of coloured lesbians in wheelchairs who have adopted twin-daughters named 'Oprah' and 'Whoopie'.

How great would this country be if that were acheiveable.

We would be so progressive, nothing becoming systemic everything changing all of the time; no sooner does one group achieve favoured minority status before another group accuses them of being oppressors and demand to be 'equal'. And it rolls on ad infinitum.

I hope we all see that soon.  :)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 6:46am:

Fair fair- its late. I was raised in New Guinea- my brother was born in New Guinea but it still buggers me. It is a cancer and I'll come back to the conversation even tho I am guilty of transgression as a whitey in Australia at current. Names can be so ugly but .. yeh I'll come back to it later!

That will Make my Day, Death. I look forward to your return.  :) 8-)

Professors are telling us that having a quota of women in parliament is nothing more than a silly affectation based upon early childhood being all about pink or blue, dolls or cap-pistols.

link

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 7:08am:

Professors are telling us that having a quota of women in parliament is nothing more than a silly affectation based upon early childhood being all about pink or blue, dolls or cap-pistols. link

'She thinks women are better at multitasking as society requires them to be'

Not having read the rest of the article I thought always that they had to read atleast social cues, of which there are many and may almost/(probably?!?) qualify as multitasking because of the enormity of such, better than men as they have the absolute responsibilty of furthering generations.

'Ethnicism' has been a lot more antagonistic than racism.

*****

On the question of race ~ I can't find any information on where the Pacific Islanders came from.

Needless to say their body-type is totally unsuited to a diet of bananas, coconuts, and shallow-water fish ~ and must have originated from somewhere where the food was plentiful and full of protein.

I doubt that cannibalism can account for their large size. With the few food resources available to them, there's no way today's Pacific Islanders developed such body-mass from living on the islands.

On the other hand, our aborigines have the perfect body-type for Australian conditions.

BigOl64 wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 6:46am:

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 3:00pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 2:56pm: I agree. Why have conservative parties? We should have nothing but progressive, left wing parties competing in all elections. Exactly. All composed of coloured lesbians in wheelchairs who have adopted twin-daughters named 'Oprah' and 'Whoopie'. How great would this country be if that were acheiveable. We would be so progressive, nothing becoming systemic everything changing all of the time; no sooner does one group achieve favoured minority status before another group accuses them of being oppressors and demand to be 'equal'. And it rolls on ad infinitum. I hope we all see that soon.  :)

Yep. It's a never ending cycle of idiocy.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hUnJfkdH8lU/UxuRx9-VgJI/AAAAAAACjYw/gfMsbmS8oiY/s1600/Toon+M8c.jpg

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 7:08am:

Professors are telling us that having a quota of women in parliament is nothing more than a silly affectation based upon early childhood being all about pink or blue, dolls or cap-pistols. link

the trouble is herb.. they would have to stagger the age group.. imagine if they all went off on paid maternity leave the same week???>.

and who the hell is going to be game to ask each women what her age is????mmmmmmmmmmmmmm

a job for you do you think herb?

Soren wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 10:19am:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-hUnJfkdH8lU/UxuRx9-VgJI/AAAAAAACjYw/gfMsbmS8oiY/s1600/Toon+M8c.jpg

I like that soren ;D ;D ;D... accept its not that far away.,.

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 9:07am:

'Ethnicism' has been a lot more antagonistic than racism. ***** On the question of race ~ I can't find any information on where the Pacific Islanders came from. Needless to say their body-type is totally unsuited to a diet of bananas, coconuts, and shallow-water fish ~ and must have originated from somewhere where the food was plentiful and full of protein. I doubt that cannibalism can account for their large size. With the few food resources available to them, there's no way today's Pacific Islanders developed such body-mass from living on the islands. On the other hand, our aborigines have the perfect body-type for Australian conditions.

Not an expert on cannibalism but pretty sure it was always a wartime activity that in no way sustained daily needs.

http://ahb.brassland.org/wp_ahb_tngkix/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/authenticity3.jpg


http://www.thelovelyplanet.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/By-bentborn_Denmark.jpg

Difference. We all know it.

Apparently, in the top photo, the bloke on the left has a vagina. :D

Soren wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 9:45pm:

http://ahb.brassland.org/wp_ahb_tngkix/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/authenticity3.jpg http://www.thelovelyplanet.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/By-bentborn_Denmark.jpg Difference. We all know it.

Fud !!

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 9:07am:

'Ethnicism' has been a lot more antagonistic than racism. ***** On the question of race ~ I can't find any information on where the Pacific Islanders came from. Needless to say their body-type is totally unsuited to a diet of bananas, coconuts, and shallow-water fish ~ and must have originated from somewhere where the food was plentiful and full of protein. I doubt that cannibalism can account for their large size. With the few food resources available to them, there's no way today's Pacific Islanders developed such body-mass from living on the islands. On the other hand, our aborigines have the perfect body-type for Australian conditions.

It's not just diet that determines body size. A warrior culture will probably result in the same thing, regardless of what they eat. There is plenty of protein available to Islanders, especially if they have a way of keeping the population down.

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 8:48am:

It's not just diet that determines body size. A warrior culture will probably result in the same thing, regardless of what they eat.

How so? The Japanese were very much a warrior culture going back into the Mists of Time, and China's warlords culture goes back to pre-historical times.


freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 8:48am:

There is plenty of protein available to Islanders, especially if they have a way of keeping the population down.

I'm not convinced. I've seen the documentaries. Only in recent times have they had pigs and chickens. It was all root vegetables, coconuts, and beachside small fish for them.

They're not even black, and yet are closer to the equator than our aborigines.

I see islanders everywhere, and their sheer bulk makes no sense from the point of view of living on a subsistence diet.

Quote:

How so? The Japanese were very much a warrior culture going back into the Mists of Time, and China's warlords culture goes back to pre-historical times.

The Chinese were also routinely starving to death. Don't let hollywood be your substitute for reality. The Islanders may not have dramatised past battles into movie lengths features. That doesn't mean it happened less often.


Quote:

I'm not convinced. I've seen the documentaries. Only in recent times have they had pigs and chickens. It was all root vegetables, coconuts, and beachside small fish for them.

What about turtles and large marine mammals? Even pipis can give you plenty of protein. I am also not sure why you dismiss fish as a source of protein, and think pig is more important. You can't eat pig every day. You can eat fish every day.

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 12:35pm:

The Chinese were also routinely starving to death.

Not relevant. Body-type is not determined by the occasional absence of food ~ or glut of plenty.

My personal theory is that the Chinese originated from the snow country in northern China, and the Pacific Islanders were the original inhabitants of mainland China.

I once lectured one of my Chinese workmates with the theory that his sneaky eyes were due to his race having originally lived in the 'snow country' where epicanthic folds protect the eyes against glare. Eskimos used to make slotted eye-pieces out of drift wood and walrus tusks to wear whenever they went out hunting on the ice.

My captive audience hung onto my every word and didn't make any objections to these suggestions. I think I may have opened his eyes in this regard.


freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 12:35pm:

Don't let hollywood be your substitute for reality.

Before I was 10 years old I had spent 7 years of my life in both north and southern China. My father spoke Mandarin like a native. That by no means makes me an expert, but neither does it make me entirely dependent on Hollywood for my information.


freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 12:35pm:

The Islanders may not have dramatised past battles into movie lengths features. That doesn't mean it happened less often.

The warrior theory is not going to float. The need for Sumo wrestling down through the Ages in Pacific Islander society was not at a premium.

All that bulk needs to be fed. From an evolutionary point of view it's hugely inefficient for these type of homo sapiens to have to feed 250 kilograms of blubber each day rather than a modest body-mass. That bulk had no strategic Darwinian advantage for surviving on coconuts and rock-pool molluscs ~~ quite the opposite.


freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 12:35pm:

What about turtles and large marine mammals?

Scarce as hen's teeth. The coastal waters would soon have been depleted of large live-stock. Deep-sea craft was so scarce among islander people that it was the reason Captain Cook got killed. They pinched his rowing boat and killed him rather than give it back. Their diet was mostly tidal pool protein and the occasional beached whale.


freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 12:35pm:

Even pipis can give you plenty of protein. I am also not sure why you dismiss fish as a source of protein, and think pig is more important. You can't eat pig every day. You can eat fish every day.

Correct. But there's only so much fish to go around. It makes no sense to have Islanders needing to feed a 250k bulk to stay alive, when all they need be is little skinny guys like our abos.

And ... the trump card is .... why aren't they burnt black like our abos, or the subcontinental Indians, or the Africans ... ?

Answer: Because they migrated down from mainland China where the eatin' was finger-lickin' good.

If Arab Joe is considered rascist, what about Irish Joyce?  Australian Bill, American Fred, British Harry?    If we use this definition:

"noun
noun: racism1. the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races"

On reading a posting say "That Arab Joe has really messed up the budget this time"  Surely that is conjecture in the reader's minds as to the intent of the poster.

if the posting went "As with all other Arabs, Joe Hockey has really messed up the budget this time"  That leaves little room for conjecture in the reader's minds.

Quote:

Not relevant. Body-type is not determined by the occasional absence of food ~ or glut of plenty.

It is if the biggest people starve to death.


Quote:

Before I was 10 years old I had spent 7 years of my life in both north and southern China. My father spoke Mandarin like a native. That by no means makes me an expert, but neither does it make me entirely dependent on Hollywood for my information.

It does not make you anything at all.


Quote:

All that bulk needs to be fed. From an evolutionary point of view it's hugely inefficient for these type of homo sapiens to have to feed 250 kilograms of blubber each day rather than a modest body-mass. That bulk had no strategic Darwinian advantage for surviving on coconuts and rock-pool molluscs ~~ quite the opposite.

It did help in war, especially stone age war. I didn't realise we were merely talking about fat.


Quote:

Scarce as hen's teeth. The coastal waters would soon have been depleted of large live-stock.

That depends on the size of the human population.


Quote:

Deep-sea craft was so scarce among islander people that it was the reason Captain Cook got killed.

All you need is a canoe. You don't have to cross oceans to hunt turtles etc.


Quote:

And ... the trump card is .... why aren't they burnt black like our abos, or the subcontinental Indians, or the Africans ... ?

Who's to say they weren't? Ever heard of a tan? It's probably to do with tree cover.

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 6:43pm:

Quote: Not relevant. Body-type is not determined by the occasional absence of food ~ or glut of plenty. It is if the biggest people starve to death.

;D Starvation doesn't favour the skinny.


Quote:

Before I was 10 years old I had spent 7 years of my life in both north and southern China. My father spoke Mandarin like a native. That by no means makes me an expert, but neither does it make me entirely dependent on Hollywood for my information.

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 6:43pm:

It does not make you anything at all.

Ouch.

You whimsically pigeon-holed me as being a naive student of Hollywood blockbuster historical action movies without having a clue as to my background or credentials, and so you've now opted for petulance with an offensive one-liner that you hope will help you to recover from your pratfall. 


Quote:

All that bulk needs to be fed. From an evolutionary point of view it's hugely inefficient for these type of homo sapiens to have to feed 250 kilograms of blubber each day rather than a modest body-mass. That bulk had no strategic Darwinian advantage for surviving on coconuts and rock-pool molluscs ~~ quite the opposite.

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 6:43pm:

It did help in war, especially stone age war.

There were no Stone Age wars. Populations were a fraction of what they are today, and were spread across large landmasses groaning with food on the hoof. 


freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 6:43pm:

I didn't realise we were merely talking about fat.

Survival. We're talking about body-types developed through evolution to maximise the chances of survival in various types of environment.


Quote:

Scarce as hen's teeth. The coastal waters would soon have been depleted of large live-stock.

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 6:43pm:

That depends on the size of the human population.

The Islanders' main means of catching fish is to trap small fish in nets during periods of high tide. The tide goes out and they pick up the flapping fish.


Quote:

Deep-sea craft was so scarce among islander people that it was the reason Captain Cook got killed.

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 6:43pm:

All you need is a canoe. You don't have to cross oceans to hunt turtles etc.

Not quite true.

As I've said elsewhere, when the first fleets landed in Sydney Harbour they discovered that the local natives didn't have any kind of water craft that could go beyond the harbour heads into the open sea, and so they lent the natives their sturdy rowing boats so they could catch something more than the starvation diet they had been living on from the foreshores of the harbour.


Quote:

And ... the trump card is .... why aren't they burnt black like our abos, or the subcontinental Indians, or the Africans ... ?

freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 6:43pm:

Who's to say they weren't?

They weren't what?


freediver wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 6:43pm:

Ever heard of a tan?

There's that petulant streak again.

Come on Walter.  Stop playing dumb.  We all know you were a Senior Officer of the London Bobbies when you were just 19 'cause you told us you were.  You don't need to joust with the likes of the windmill that is freediver.  You are well above that petty crap.

Flee and take Sancho Panza with ye!

Aussie wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 7:51pm:

Come on Walter.  Stop playing dumb.  We all know you were a Senior Officer of the London Bobbies when you were just 19 'cause you told us you were.  You don't need to joust with the likes of the windmill that is freediver.  You are well above that petty crap. Flee and take Sancho Panza with ye!

meh.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 6^th, 2014 at 11:53pm:

A nasty pattern over a solid period of time of anti-Arabic racism attacking one politician. Not acceptable anymore Adel, adjust your actions.

good call.
The guy is obnoxious. 'nasty' is correct.

Soren wrote on Mar 10^th, 2014 at 8:49pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Mar 6th, 2014 at 11:53pm: A nasty pattern over a solid period of time of anti-Arabic racism attacking one politician. Not acceptable anymore Adel, adjust your actions. good call. The guy is obnoxious. 'nasty' is correct.

So making racial comments about Joe Hockey is off limits. I'll look forward to seeing Andrei's warnings when the same type of comments are made about Labor and Green politicians.

;D ;D ;D ;D

yeah right

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 10:22pm:

Soren wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 9:45pm: http://ahb.brassland.org/wp_ahb_tngkix/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/authenticity3.jpg http://www.thelovelyplanet.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/By-bentborn_Denmark.jpg Difference. We all know it. Fud !!

I am glad you geddit.

Finally!!

Racism rears its ugly head again in the UK.

A black comedian is playing the Race Card when he says that British TV and movies are woefully short of black actors.

He can't be serious.

He's lucky there are any appearances by blacks at all. Britain's Negro population is only a tiny 3.5%.


Quote:

Comedian and actor Lenny Henry launched a scathing attack on British TV hits including Broadchurch, Miranda and Midsomer Murders last night for being too white. The 55-year-old criticised the shows for having fewer black actors than similar programmes in America, saying they were not representative of modern Britain. Giving the annual Bafta Television Lecture, Henry said: ‘What is going on? This is 2014. ‘The evolution of black and ethnic minority involvement in British drama seems to lurch one step forward and two steps back, a bit like John Sergeant in Strictly Come Dancing. Except he had a job at the end.’ Mr Henry highlighted ITV crime drama Broadchurch, BBC sitcom Miranda and Northern Irish hit Mrs Brown’s Boys as examples of shows with majority white casts.

link

3.5% Negroes in the UK and he's bitching about white racism ...