The term has nothing to do with skin colour or race, it's a mindset a World view generally a quite minded narrow one.

I think Derwent needs a lie down by the way, wowsers

It's like you are trying to be offended. Nobody is even arguing with you it's true things used to be considered acceptable quite rightly aren't now, those dolls we or the people who owned them weren't racist, times were different obviously you don't need to post fake stories about old women being verbally abused on busses by teenagers to highlight that, mainly because I don't think that would happen in the real World. That's all I am and a few others are saying. Also suggesting that anyone voting Labour is somehow endorsing racism or is a hypocrite without any sort of valid reason or evidence is quite frankly absurd. It's like you are using what happened at Pools the other week and some of the stuff said in the fallout to validate your dislike and justify your stance on Corbyn. It's a bit mixed up to honest I'm struggling with the correlation between the two issues.

Oh do give over. What happened at Pools has no bearing here. It is all a figment of your imagination. I have never posted fake news on what happened on buses, I have never mentioned buses. Nor have I mentioned what happened at the dover game in any of these threads. I have never mentioned the dover game.
You are wriggling as usual. It is what you do. I am actually worried about you. Has your alcohol intake increased whilst you have been in foreign climes. Leave the sherry alone mate and listen to your uncle derwent. I am here to help you.

My apologies it was a fake train it makes all the difference here.

By the way I’m either operating in some sort of a parallel universe or the same bloke who posted this in this same thread is now off his long run suggesting I am some sort of alcoholic crank

Derwent, you need to speak to the decision maker, PJ's wife will be back soon!

You are clearly a very sad man. If we are mentioning wives (I am not sure why you feel the need to) I feel very sorry for yours.

What a thread this is turning into. This forum is not what it was sadly.

On the question of whether the term 'gammon' is discriminatory, let's think about what discrimination means. Here's a quote I used recently in my lectures recently to define discrimination:

"Discrimination refers to a pattern of the exercise of power or provision of service that results in unequal, unfavourable, and unjustifiable treatment based on a person’s sex, gender, ‘race’, ethnicity, culture, religion, language, class, sexual orientation, age, physical ability, or any other improper ground."

I just can't see how 'gammon' fits into any of these criteria. It's a political insult concerning a particular political view. While it may not be best way to conduct a political debate, it's clearly not discriminatory. But I think it's worth remembering where the term came from; it was a reaction, in many respects, to the insult 'snowflake'. Those in glass houses...

I haven't been a regular reader or poster on here for a few years, but the most notable thing from reading this last week is the transformation of Derwent, from what I remember to be a fairly restrained contributor, whose main points were about the futility of travelling up to home matches from deepest Yorkshire over the recent lean years. I'm not sure I recognise this version.

You'll see the pink cheeks of their arses giving a victory wiggle on election day .

It's cos he gets his next door neighbour to post for him.

Iv'e thoroughly enjoyed all of his posts this week.Keep up the good work mr derwent.

Oh dear. If Sussex agrees with you it’s time to pack it in.

Thanks for that mate. The only thing that has changed is that I've gone from supporting labour to not supporting labour, which is my right.
However if there is anything you don't understand about why I don't support them anymore, I am always willing to discuss it with you, although i think i have made my position abundantly clear.
The one that hasn't changed is i still consider you as a friend.
Oh and the journey is still a pig.

Nonsense and you (and others) know it. Have you looked up any definitions of hate speech recently?

It is similar to trying to excuse other racism or to blame provocation for it.

‘Hate speech’ we live in truly absurd times.

Leaders of countries and political parties come and go.
In a short time Johnson, Trump and Corbyn etc etc may no long be in the positions they are now. Things can change rapidly and thats why i support & vote for the party that represents my long term views.

Did you read my post? For it to be hate speech, it has to discriminatory. As I said, it just doesn't fit, as it's not targeted at any protected characteristic under the Equality Act.

But if you do think it's hate speech, how does that fit with some of the labels you routinely use to abuse those on the left, on this board? Is the language you use ok? Your complete lack of self-awareness here is staggering.

Tickled pink to know you're the most vocal supporter of Jez and Diane on the bunker mr fatman .

So in your opinion it’s neither discriminatory nor used against and targeted towards white people?

The thing is I genuinely think that you believe that.

The snowflakes seem to have migrated to the other side.

Gammon is hate speech now? Get to fuck.

It's used because of the increase in blood pressure at the mention of foreigners, are Tommeh or any other shite the sun tells you all to say and think. Going pink, angry, like an agitated pig. Gammon.

You mean like you're doing now.
You need a nice story to calm you down.

Now there was this 'ere train you see...................yes yes I know i should have started Once upon a time and will you stop chucking your teddy out.............and your dummy.

EEEEE that reminds me of yesteryear when if you changed just one word of the bairn's favourite story there was hell on.

Oh the irony of those calling us all remoaners snowflakes etc. And now they are offended. They will be going to the European court of justice next to complain.

You should be ashamed of yourselves.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50552068

These things seem very consistent to me.

One thing they never contain are any actual examples or specific cases of anti semitism. Which is rather odd if you ask me given the scale and severity of the accusations. I suppose timing is everything people don’t look into details they see headlines.

Great timing. You could be forgiven for thinking the rabbi is a tory.

A good proportion of the Labour Party want him out as well including a few high profile backers.

It’s a perfect storm for the Worst government in living history to continue causing irreparable damage to our country.

The article says very little in truth but the person involved obviously has a certain status. Labour need to respond quickly, respectfully and appropriately outlining what they are doing to combat antisemitism. They are people forced to tackle an issue that is being blown out of all proportion head on whilst on the other side far worse is being simply swept under the carpet.

I see the chief rabbi and heseltine are agreeing with me.
They both want rid of corbyn
Hessy also wants rid of johnson and the tories.
Rabbi says there is anti semitism in the labour party
Rabbi says they've failed to elimate it and that it comes from the top.

I keep saying I don't want either party, neither does heseltine;
I am a traditional labour supporter and he is a traditional tory but we both have the guts to want our parties to reject extremism.

Maybe we should form a government of anti extremists, I would vote for that.

So do you reckon there is anti=semitism in the labour party?

Why would you ask that question whilst quoting a post a acknowledges their is? Unless you haven’t even read it? Nobody has ever denied an issue exists.

But I would imagine it exists on the periphery of most walks of life like most forms of discrimination. A large body of people without bad eggs doesn’t exist. It’s like going around in circles with you.

The Chief Rabbi’s Twitter feed is quite interesting by the way like this from July 23rd this year;

CR: “I am delighted to congratulate Boris Johnson on becoming the next leader of the Conservative Party & our next PM. May he be blessed with the wisdom to successfully navigate the political uncertainties we face & bring healing & prosperity to our great country.”

and there you have it. A so called well respected rabbi absolutely riddled with political bias. A still the gammons fall for it. And when you read the full article its noted quite clearly that the jewish community have far more to fear from the far right. But the Rabbi is a tory.

Exactly, Mr Afar. The Chief Rabbi is a Tory supporter who also equates any support for the Palestinian cause with anti-semitism. Given that Corbyn is the most left wing Labour leader for some time and an advocate of Palestinian rights it would have been a bit of a surprise to see headlines reading 'Chief Rabbi Welcomes Criticism of Israel's Gaza Policy and Looks Forward To A Labour Government'.

I appreciate that you're fed up with Corbyn Mr Derwent but why repeat these ridiculous Tory slurs against a bloke who is obviously a long standing anti-racist? Johnson talks about Muslim women being like letterboxes and bank robbers, watermelon smiles, picaninnies and being more scared of black kids than white ones but you call Labour racist.

If you don't want to vote Labour this time that's obviously your right but please bear this in mind:

Vote Conservative and you're backing a party that is far more racist than Labour and has proved it with racist policies as well as racist rhetoric.

Vote Lib Dem and you're backing a party that sat in coalition with the Tories while the hostile environment that caused the Windrush scandal was created.

Vote Brexit Party and you're endorsing a cesspit of extremist views.

[quote="PJPoolie"]Why would you ask that question whilst quoting a post a acknowledges their is? Unless you haven’t even read it? Nobody has ever denied an issue exists.

But I would imagine it exists on the periphery of most walks of life like most forms of discrimination. A large body of people without bad eggs doesn’t exist. It’s like going around in circles with you.[/quote

I was just making sure that I got it right.
I have taken note of it for future reference.
I agree with your bad egg comment and knew that anyway although what that has got to do with my question I'm not sure.
I also agree that you're going round in circles.
We're doing a lot of agreeing here.
No you can't take me out, I'm spoken for.

He is obviously a tory and supports the tory party, which is his right and i don't associate with any of that but that shouldn't stop me or anybody else for agreeing on some of the things he says.
I actually agree with some of the things you say. Nobody is wrong all of the time, not even you.

I don't agree with Heseltine either when he advises people to vote lib dems but i do agree with his views on corby baby.

We know the rabbi is a tory but he's entitled to be if he chooses or is that not allowed in marxist circles.
Mr I is a tory but we all love him don't we.
Are you not riddled with political bias?
Which of the gammon race is falling for what? I don't recognise this gammon race and wouldn't know where to look for them.
The rabbi and I would probably disagree on most things political, especially support for the tories but I agree with everybody who says corbyn is not fit to run this country.
You need to be able to differentiate, Dibbs.
I only engage with your wind ups because I like you and your alternative intelligence level makes me laugh.

Thanks for your advice Mr T but no thanks. When I want it I'll ask for it if you don't mind.

I'm a long standing anti racist but i make mistakes but when I make mistakes and explain the reason and stop those mistakes from occurring again, nobody seems to want to accept that. I would expect people to accept that but they don't. Some of them don't actually say that but you can tell. Once a racist always a racist seems to be their theme and they examine every word that is said in an attempt to apply the racist slur.
You don't want me to vote tory because they are racist themselves. I won't vote for them
But why don't you give the same advice about labour, or is it ok to be less racist as you imply. I won't vote for them either. Zero tolerance remember. If I apply zero tolerance to fellow Poolies who demonstrate racist tendencies, I am certainly going to apply it to politicians, OF ANY PARTY.
I'm not voting lib dem or brexit either.
I don't know how many times I've said this but I am not attracted to any of them and haven't a clue where my cross will go
I will consider voting labour as and when they get rid of the far left element but not until.
As I have said i don't agree with everything the rabbi says and that applies to everybody nor do i excuse anybody who implies that it is ok to take the lesser of two evils. They both need stamping out with zero tolerance and anybody who makes exceptions, for whatever reason, cannot describe themselves as zero tolerant. Zero tolerance is and should always be zero tolerance. That is not me giving a tory view, or anybody else's view.......that is me giving my view.
This forum has played a big part in formulating that stance so people can take a bow, including you Mr T.

and by not voting at all you more or less endorse a tory government.

Not necessarily.
The only thing you can be sure of is I'll be depriving labour of my usual vote.
I could bring your analysis a bit nearer to fruition by actually voting tory.
I'm sure you wouldn't want that now, would you????

WAIT A MINUTE

On the other hand your intention could be to get me to vote tory which would be a two vote swing in favour of the tories and therefore worth double.
Are you playing the labour supporter whilst secretly you are the tory recruiting sergeant????
Well you crafty bugger.

Couple of things Mr Derwent:

1. I don't agree with you when you say, "Some of them don't actually say that but you can tell". I can only speak for myself but if I think somebody is being racist I say so. I think you did get caught in the middle of a heated argument about the racist incident at the club and ended up sounding like you were arguing that blame should be shared. If remember rightly you then said that wasn't the case and that should have been the end of the matter. Unfortunately some people haven't left it alone including one or two who like nothing better than baiting 'snowflakes' as well as some who wanted to keep giving you a bit of stick. You haven't exctly held back yourself as far as criticising others goes although you are always perfectly civil about it!

2. Racism exists widely enough for any decent sized political party to expect that some racists will join them and also that some of their members will already harbour racist views. I'd love it if that wasn't the case, but it is and it means that applying the zero tolerance idea in the way you have doesn't work because even the most well-meaning leader couldn't guarantee to completely eradicate the problem.

In those circumstances isn't it better to say who tries hardest to oppose racism and get it out of their party? The answer is pretty obviously Corbyn. If you've got good reasons not to vote for Corbyn that's fair enough but going on about him being anti-semitic when he's got long standing anti-racist credentials isn't fair or reasonable.

I hear what you say Mr T and I accept that it is a difficult one to police, never mind to eradicate but eradicated it we must. But if we accept that is easier said than done and therefore adopt a lesser of two evils stance then that is a whole new ball game and we then have to look at who actually takes racism seriously.
They all talk a good game on this, as do the football authorities and now we hear cricket has the problem in New Zealand.
I know zero tolerance is the ultimate stand and ideally the best one but it is a one size fits all and is not universally tolerated.
Everybody has to get involved in this with a certain degree of tolerance. We all don't see things in the same way and from the same angle, nor have we had the same experiences in life.
In order to solve racism we have to understand it. We have to know why people suddenly dive into it, often without warning or an apparent good reason. We have to have the tooling and framework to educate and explain and not just scream racist at every corner, even though racism in some circumstances is blatantly obvious. We have to make people think before they embark on racist outbursts. We have to look at what triggers racism in the first place because i firmly believe we can move forward with that knowledge.
Some people will see sense in what I'm trying to say and others will simply dismiss it as defending racism and racists.
Hopefully the former will outweigh the latter because it appears to be getting worse and we are all equally responsible.
What a fantastic legacy we can leave to the next generations if we can find the answer.
This place is ready made to create a think tank on the subject and to exchange ideas and solutions as long as we are able to listen to one another's stories and experiences with an open mind, instead of the ridicule and intolerance sometimes shown on here.
All that achieves is retaliation as I have demonstrated.
On the other hand we can do nothing.

I know that tweets aren't exactly objective 'facts', but this one's an interesting one, given the discussion above:

https://twitter.com/LouiseRawAuthor/sta ... 48416?s=20

Four times tonight Andrew Neil offered Jeremy Corbyn the opportunity to apologise to the Jewish people and four times he refused.
I have no comment to make on that other than the British people will decide and it will probably mean that the tories will get in again and the people to blame are Corbyn, momentum and their supporters.
Turkeys voting for Xmas doesn't even begin to cover it.
Can anybody explain to me why, after nine years of austerity, you are putting the country in danger of another five.
You might get lucky but you can make your own luck by getting rid of this disease taking over the labour party. They haven't got the guts to form their own party because they know they would be a laughing stock and if, by some mishap, they do get in they will destroy the labour party forever.
There has been talk of closet tories but who are the real closet tories.

It might have helped if Andrew Neil had let Corbyn answer on one hand and then actually listen to the few answers he did allow Corbyn to give. Corbyn should have just accused Neil of being an angry arsehole and punched him in the face. I thought Neil made a fool of himself.

Both as bad as each other

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50561043

I await the Rabbis critisism of the tories now.

Phil. I have been calling for the party to ditch him for months even years. Corbyn and Momentum are the reason the tories got in in 2017. They are the reason the country vote tory and if the tories get in again they are responsible for it. Why can't you see that.
We both want the tories out.
My way had a chance of getting them out, your way puts the matter in the hands of the gods.

Welcome to the world of journalism. They do that to everybody. The strong handle it and the weak neutrals get devoured.