One of these Trump things about which there is considerable outrage.

[Sir C]

He is, they say, determined to deport millions of people from the US, and this, they say, is racist. From what I have read, however, he seems to be promising to deport millions of illegal immigrants from the US. This puzzles me.

I mean, isn't 'deporting' exactly what you do to illegal immigrants? If you didn't, then what would be the point of being a legal immigrant?

Racism is complicated, isn't it?

[Burney]

He is, they say, determined to deport millions of people from the US, and this, they say, is racist. From what I have read, however, he seems to be promising to deport millions of illegal immigrants from the US. This puzzles me.

I mean, isn't 'deporting' exactly what you do to illegal immigrants? If you didn't, then what would be the point of being a legal immigrant?

Racism is complicated, isn't it?

It is indeed. It's like how it's also racist to point out that someone clearly isn't a child or for that matter a refugee when the only excuse for letting them enter the country is that they are a child and/or a refugee. I'm sure Gary Lineker and Lily Allen could explain why doing this makes you a racist, but I'm not sure.

Essentially, I think it's that if someone is poorer and browner than you, then questioning their right to live in your country is racism.

[Pat Vegas]

He is, they say, determined to deport millions of people from the US, and this, they say, is racist. From what I have read, however, he seems to be promising to deport millions of illegal immigrants from the US. This puzzles me.

I mean, isn't 'deporting' exactly what you do to illegal immigrants? If you didn't, then what would be the point of being a legal immigrant?

Racism is complicated, isn't it?

It would seem a shame that some criminal types* who would not add anything to your society who came in illegally should stay on the basis of not seemingly to appear racist.

but Pat Vegas** can't move to the US. a hard working Awimb posting, son of a gun who would contribute to the country chasing the American Dream.

It's a bit bizarre as the rules Trump wishes to employ are pretty much what canada do already. But they are seen as the easy going Northern neighbour.

* Some criminal types not everyone is a criminal. Yet again if they are 'illegal' then they have broken the law and are also criminal.

**Yes that's right I've turned it about myself again.

[Pat Vegas]

It is indeed. It's like how it's also racist to point out that someone clearly isn't a child or for that matter a refugee when the only excuse for letting them enter the country is that they are a child and/or a refugee. I'm sure Gary Lineker and Lily Allen could explain why doing this makes you a racist, but I'm not sure.

Essentially, I think it's that if someone is poorer and browner than you, then questioning their right to live in your country is racism.

When did Lily Allen appoint herself as spokesperson on all matters?

I thought she was alright before.

[Burney]

When did Lily Allen appoint herself as spokesperson on all matters?

I thought she was alright before.

When she needed the publicity?

[Pat Vegas]

When she needed the publicity?

She can fark off low-rent Lady Gaga.

[Ash]

He is, they say, determined to deport millions of people from the US, and this, they say, is racist. From what I have read, however, he seems to be promising to deport millions of illegal immigrants from the US. This puzzles me.

I mean, isn't 'deporting' exactly what you do to illegal immigrants? If you didn't, then what would be the point of being a legal immigrant?

Racism is complicated, isn't it?

Obama deported 2.5 million people. More than any other US president.

[Sir C]

Obama deported 2.5 million people. More than any other US president.

Racist? Non-racist? I just can't tell any more.

[Pat Vegas]

Racist? Non-racist? I just can't tell any more.

Non racist. As Obama has darker ski..... actually forget it I'll only end up in trouble.

[Burney]

Racist? Non-racist? I just can't tell any more.

Well it's become meaningless, hasn't it? The same word that once denoted the sort of person who'd openly abuse or discriminate against someone of a different race is now reflexively used to describe anyone who questions an open-door immigration policy or wonders aloud whether there might be a problem with some of the habits and attitudes endemic to Islamic communities in the UK. As such, it loses any meaning and increasingly loses impact.

[World's End Stella]

Well it's become meaningless, hasn't it? The same word that once denoted the sort of person who'd openly abuse or discriminate against someone of a different race is now reflexively used to describe anyone who questions an open-door immigration policy or wonders aloud whether there might be a problem with some of the habits and attitudes endemic to Islamic communities in the UK. As such, it loses any meaning and increasingly loses impact.

Can someone point me to an example of someone being called a racist because they questioned an immigration policy?

Is this editorial nonsense in papers like the Guardian or is it typically a public accusation by an individual?

[Burney]

Can someone point me to an example of someone being called a racist because they questioned an immigration policy?

Is this editorial nonsense in papers like the Guardian or is it typically a public accusation by an individual?

Well just off the top of my head there was the time a serving Prime Minister called a lifelong Labour supporter a 'bigoted woman' because she dared to question his immigration policy.

[Sir C]

Can someone point me to an example of someone being called a racist because they questioned an immigration policy?

Is this editorial nonsense in papers like the Guardian or is it typically a public accusation by an individual?

Hmm, how about the newspaper editorials, social media posts and demonstrating snowflakes calling anyone who voted 'Leave' a racist bigot. Did you not notice that?

[World's End Stella]

Well just off the top of my head there was the time a serving Prime Minister called a lifelong Labour supporter a 'bigoted woman' because she dared to question his immigration policy.

Um, an off the cuff comment by that one-eyed, fat-headed, Jock tosser about some woman he met for all of a minute or two? BTW, we don't actually know that he felt she was bigoted for that reason.

No, sorry Burney, with all this outrage about the left calling everyone something that ends with 'ism' all the time so much so that it's threatening our very existence I wouldn't mind a better example, if you have one.

[World's End Stella]

Hmm, how about the newspaper editorials, social media posts and demonstrating snowflakes calling anyone who voted 'Leave' a racist bigot. Did you not notice that?

No, I didn't. Do you have an example? BTW, I use virtually no social media.

[Sir C]

No, I didn't. Do you have an example? BTW, I use virtually no social media.

:shrug: You can do yyour own research, old chap.

[redgunamo]

Um, an off the cuff comment by that one-eyed, fat-headed, Jock tosser about some woman he met for all of a minute or two? BTW, we don't actually know that he felt she was bigoted for that reason.

No, sorry Burney, with all this outrage about the left calling everyone something that ends with 'ism' all the time so much so that it's threatening our very existence I wouldn't mind a better example, if you have one.

It's the other way about, I think. There was no real outrage from Trump's side, but it was clearly ridiculous to find him appalling whilst preparing to return Bill Clinton to the White House instead. It was the Clintons themselves that lowered the appropriate-behaviour-bar, made the rules. So why was there no outrage from their own supporters.

[Monty92]

Um, an off the cuff comment by that one-eyed, fat-headed, Jock tosser about some woman he met for all of a minute or two? BTW, we don't actually know that he felt she was bigoted for that reason.

No, sorry Burney, with all this outrage about the left calling everyone something that ends with 'ism' all the time so much so that it's threatening our very existence I wouldn't mind a better example, if you have one.

You think identity politics is just a made up thing by paranoid people on the right and doesn't play a significant role in every area of cultural and political life?

[Burney]

Um, an off the cuff comment by that one-eyed, fat-headed, Jock tosser about some woman he met for all of a minute or two? BTW, we don't actually know that he felt she was bigoted for that reason.

No, sorry Burney, with all this outrage about the left calling everyone something that ends with 'ism' all the time so much so that it's threatening our very existence I wouldn't mind a better example, if you have one.

Ah, the old 'Ask for an example, be given an obvious, clear-cut and extremely high profile one and then reject it because...err...reasons' approach.

Google is your friend. If you're actually interested in evidence that counters your point of view, that is - which, of course, you aren't.

[Alberto Balsam Rodriguez]

He is, they say, determined to deport millions of people from the US, and this, they say, is racist. From what I have read, however, he seems to be promising to deport millions of illegal immigrants from the US. This puzzles me.

I mean, isn't 'deporting' exactly what you do to illegal immigrants? If you didn't, then what would be the point of being a legal immigrant?

Racism is complicated, isn't it?


I must admit that I have seen nothing to suggest that there is outrage at Trump's decision to deport illegals. Do you have a sauce?

[redgunamo]

I must admit that I have seen nothing to suggest that there is outrage at Trump's decision to deport illegals. Do you have a sauce?

I believe he suggested Google.

[World's End Stella]

You think identity politics is just a made up thing by paranoid people on the right and doesn't play a significant role in every area of cultural and political life?

You'll have to point me to where I said anything like that, Monty. BTW, I think the whole 'identity politics' thing is load of nonsense. It's just another form of democratic expression, as far as I can see.

No, what I'd like to see is an example of a credible source (i.e. not The Sun) making a logical and rational argument for immigration control (or some other controversial policy of some kind) and then being accused of racism (or some other ism) by an equally credible source.

I must confess, I read the newspapers every day, I watch the television and listen to the radio pretty much every day, and I have yet to see or hear this particular phenomena. And yet there is no shortage of outrage from the right (I would consider myself to be part of the right, BTW) about how often this occurs. Burney has provided an example of an off the cuff comment by the former prime minister after a brief conversation with an individual, I'd like something a little more tangible, if possible.

[Monty92]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136215]You'll have to point me to where I said anything like that, Monty. BTW, I think the whole 'identity politics' thing is load of nonsense. It's just another form of democratic expression, as far as I can see.

No, what I'd like to see is an example of a credible source (i.e. not The Sun) making a logical and rational argument for immigration control (or some other controversial policy of some kind) and then being accused of racism (or some other ism) by an equally credible source.

I must confess, I read the newspapers every day, I watch the television and listen to the radio pretty much every day, and I have yet to see or hear this particular phenomena. And yet there is no shortage of outrage from the right (I would consider myself to be part of the right, BTW) about how often this occurs. Burney has provided an example of an off the cuff comment by the former prime minister after a brief conversation with an individual, I'd like something a little more tangible, if possible

Trump has only said reasonable things about immigrantion policy and everyone on the left
considers him at best a racist and at worst a nazi. Is that not a good enough example?

[Ash]

You'll have to point me to where I said anything like that, Monty. BTW, I think the whole 'identity politics' thing is load of nonsense. It's just another form of democratic expression, as far as I can see.

No, what I'd like to see is an example of a credible source (i.e. not The Sun) making a logical and rational argument for immigration control (or some other controversial policy of some kind) and then being accused of racism (or some other ism) by an equally credible source.

I must confess, I read the newspapers every day, I watch the television and listen to the radio pretty much every day, and I have yet to see or hear this particular phenomena. And yet there is no shortage of outrage from the right (I would consider myself to be part of the right, BTW) about how often this occurs. Burney has provided an example of an off the cuff comment by the former prime minister after a brief conversation with an individual, I'd like something a little more tangible, if possible.

Germain Greer, saying that men pretending to be women are not women. She got crucified. (not literally, before someone points that out).

EDIT: I use this example as one of the most influential feminists in history is probably a credible authority on what a woman is.

See also Peter Tatchell: Gay Rights activist who got into trouble for defending free speech in universities.

[Luis Anaconda]

Germain Greer, saying that men pretending to be women are not women. She got crucified. (not literally, before someone points that out).

EDIT: I use this example as one of the most influential feminists in history is probably a credible authority on what a woman is.

See also Peter Tatchell: Gay Rights activist who got into trouble for defending free speech in universities.
:hehe: Still banging on about that. Seriously though - she said something controversial and people criticised her - criticism to which she was quite able to respond. How this equates to - even figuratively - being crucified is baffling

[redgunamo]

:hehe: Still banging on about that. Seriously though - she said something controversial and people criticised her - criticism to which she was quite able to respond. How this equates to - even figuratively - being crucified is baffling

I'll certainly crucify you if you post that old photograph of her in the altogether :-|

[Ash]

:hehe: Still banging on about that. Seriously though - she said something controversial and people criticised her - criticism to which she was quite able to respond. How this equates to - even figuratively - being crucified is baffling

Controversial? Odd way of spelling sensible imo. Wasn't long ago when it was controversial for a man to use women's changing rooms. Excuse my metaphor but there was a ****storm of outrage against her. Do we really have to analyse each article on the subject?

[Burney]

I'll certainly crucify you if you post that old photograph of her in the altogether :-|

I did think that it was a bit of a risk her being mentioned like that. In the old days, no sooner would you mention GG than the pic of her hairy growler would appear. It was traditional.

[TheCurly]

I did think that it was a bit of a risk her being mentioned like that. In the old days, no sooner would you mention GG than the pic of her hairy growler would appear. It was traditional.

And in the interests of equality
Pat Rice's cock

[Sir C]

Germain Greer, saying that men pretending to be women are not women. She got crucified. (not literally, before someone points that out).

EDIT: I use this example as one of the most influential feminists in history is probably a credible authority on what a woman is.

See also Peter Tatchell: Gay Rights activist who got into trouble for defending free speech in universities.

On the plus side, since the mewling lefty brats had Brexit and Trump to wail about, the transloonies have wound their necks in a bit.

Perhaps I'll be able to go for a piss without being sexually molested by crazed manwomen, after all.

[Burney]

And in the interests of equality
Pat Rice's cock

I wonder if they ever met?

[TheCurly]

I wonder if they ever met?

:shuddddddddder:

[Burney]

On the plus side, since the mewling lefty brats had Brexit and Trump to wail about, the transloonies have wound their necks in a bit.

Perhaps I'll be able to go for a piss without being sexually molested by crazed manwomen, after all.

Everyone's a pansexual these days, apparently. At least that seems to be the latest way for women who are actually straight but want to seem more interesting than they actually are and men who are gay but don't want to admit it to describe themselves.

[Sir C]

Everyone's a pansexual these days, apparently. At least that seems to be the latest way for women who are actually straight but want to seem more interesting than they actually are and men who are gay but don't want to admit it to describe themselves.

Look mate, I like cooking as much as the next bloke but I'm buggered if I'll have sex with a pan.

[Burney]

Look mate, I like cooking as much as the next bloke but I'm buggered if I'll have sex with a pan.

You could bugger yourself with a panhandle.

[Sir C]

You could bugger yourself with a panhandle.

Yes, if I were arrested for begging it would definitely affect my career.

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136215]You'll have to point me to where I said anything like that, Monty. BTW, I think the whole 'identity politics' thing is load of nonsense. It's just another form of democratic expression, as far as I can see.

No, what I'd like to see is an example of a credible source (i.e. not The Sun) making a logical and rational argument for immigration control (or some other controversial policy of some kind) and then being accused of racism (or some other ism) by an equally credible source.

I must confess, I read the newspapers every day, I watch the television and listen to the radio pretty much every day, and I have yet to see or hear this particular phenomena. And yet there is no shortage of outrage from the right (I would consider myself to be part of the right, BTW) about how often this occurs. Burney has provided an example of an off the cuff comment by the former prime minister after a brief conversation with an individual, I'd like something a little more tangible, if possible

Trump has only said reasonable things about immigrantion policy and everyone on the left
considers him at best a racist and at worst a nazi. Is that not a good enough example?

This is a reasonable statement on Mexican immigrants, is it Monty? No suggestion of racism in there anywhere, you think?

"When Mexico sends it people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people,"

So no, it's a terrible example.

[TheCurly]

[QUOTE=Monty92;4136218]

This is a reasonable statement on Mexican immigrants, is it Monty? No suggestion of racism in there anywhere, you think?

"When Mexico sends it people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people,"

So no, it's a terrible example.

I have zero love for the man WES but doesn't quite a large percentage of the heroin coming into the US is coming from Mexico?
It may not be "immigrants" that are bringing it but it's deffo Mexicans smuggling it

[Burney]

Yes, if I were arrested for begging it would definitely affect my career.

No, I was just thinking of ways to have sex with pans. Buggering oneself is the easiest (if you're a chap - ladies have their noo-noos for that sort of thing, I believe). I'm not really sure how else one would go about it, tbh.

[Burney]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136272]

I have zero love for the man WES but doesn't quite a large percentage of the heroin coming into the US is coming from Mexico?
It may not be "immigrants" that are bringing it but it's deffo Mexicans smuggling it

Yeah. Also, he's also statistically right about the levels of crime perpetrated by illegal Mexican immigrants, but hey.

[Sir C]

[QUOTE=Monty92;4136218]

This is a reasonable statement on Mexican immigrants, is it Monty? No suggestion of racism in there anywhere, you think?

"When Mexico sends it people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people,"

So no, it's a terrible example.

It may not be the most compassionate of sentiments, and it may be rather bluntly worded, but it5 seems to me entirely feasible that the chaps trying to enter the US illegally probably aren't doctors, lawyers or bankers, or indeed any of any other strata we might define as a country's 'best'. Have you checked the figures? Do Mexican illegal immigrants feature highly in crime numbers? I wouldn't be amazed if this were the case.

Blunt, definitely. Inelegant, absolutely. Rude? Possibly. Racist? No.

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136272]

I have zero love for the man WES but doesn't quite a large percentage of the heroin coming into the US is coming from Mexico?
It may not be "immigrants" that are bringing it but it's deffo Mexicans smuggling it

Very possibly, but if you used that fact as a basis for a statement much like Trump's which condemns the large majority of a rather large number of people you could quite rightly be accused of an ism. And I haven't even mentioned his assertion that the judge of Hispanic descent was incapable of ruling impartially because he was Hispanic.

I asked for an example of a credible source making a logical and rational argument and Monty brings up Donald Trump and his views on immigration :clap:

[Sir C]

No, I was just thinking of ways to have sex with pans. Buggering oneself is the easiest (if you're a chap - ladies have their noo-noos for that sort of thing, I believe). I'm not really sure how else one would go about it, tbh.

Oh, a smear of lard on a non-stick frying pan might make for a pleasant five minutes.

Back in 5.

[TheCurly]

[QUOTE=TheCurly;4136274]

Yeah. Also, he's also statistically right about the levels of crime perpetrated by illegal Mexican immigrants, but hey.

A smuggler's safe route can just as easily be used for humans or snort so closing the route is perfectly sensible.

[Burney]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136272]
Do Mexican illegal immigrants feature highly in crime numbers? I wouldn't be amazed if this were the case.

You would be correct not to be amazed. p46.

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/stats-services-publications-national-gang-report-2013/view

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136272]

It may not be the most compassionate of sentiments, and it may be rather bluntly worded, but it5 seems to me entirely feasible that the chaps trying to enter the US illegally probably aren't doctors, lawyers or bankers, or indeed any of any other strata we might define as a country's 'best'. Have you checked the figures? Do Mexican illegal immigrants feature highly in crime numbers? I wouldn't be amazed if this were the case.

Blunt, definitely. Inelegant, absolutely. Rude? Possibly. Racist? No.

Well, first of all, Trump's comment makes it clear that he assumes the majority of Mexicans living in America are criminals, so much so that he felt the need to point out that he assumes 'some are good people'. I think that most people would see that sort of assumption as falling pretty firmly in the 'racism' category.

Secondly, I asked for a credible source with a rational, objective argument. Forgive me for not considering Trump and his statements to be quite that.

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=TheCurly;4136274]

Yeah. Also, he's also statistically right about the levels of crime perpetrated by illegal Mexican immigrants, but hey.

The statement I used contains no reference to statistics at all. It's just an absurd, superficial generalisation. Not quite the logical, rational argument I'm looking for.

[Pokster]

[QUOTE=Sir C;4136277]

You would be correct not to be amazed. p46.

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/stats-services-publications-national-gang-report-2013/view

: sherlock : pg 46 of a 45 page report eh

[Sir C]

[QUOTE=Sir C;4136277]

Well, first of all, Trump's comment makes it clear that he assumes the majority of Mexicans living in America are criminals, so much so that he felt the need to point out that he assumes 'some are good people'. I think that most people would see that sort of assumption as falling pretty firmly in the 'racism' category.

Secondly, I asked for a credible source with a rational, objective argument. Forgive me for not considering Trump and his statements to be quite that.

Wasn't the context illegal immigrants? That's what I assumed. Illegal immigrants are criminal by definition, no?

I believe the point was the generally accepted response to Trump, rather than Trump himself. You seem to have fallen into the 'generally accepted' camp of categorising anything he says as racist because he said it, so it must eb racist, because he's a racist, which we know, because he says racist things. Even when he doesn't.

[TheCurly]

[QUOTE=Burney;4136284]

: sherlock : pg 46 of a 45 page report eh

It's like Lord Of The Rings,p

240 page Appendix

[Pokster]

[QUOTE=Pokster;4136287]

It's like Lord Of The Rings,p

240 page Appendix

b is messing with our minds c... in my case, it won't take him long

[Burney]

[QUOTE=Sir C;4136277]

Well, first of all, Trump's comment makes it clear that he assumes the majority of Mexicans living in America are criminals

Given that he is speaking in the present tense, that is demonstrably not the case. Indeed, the fact that you seek to interpret it in that way is evidence of your desperation to categorise him as racist for making a fair point about the situation as it currently obtains. Thus you effectively prove the point you are trying to gainsay - namely, that people like you will dismiss as racist anyone who dares to question the status quo on immigration.

QED.

[Sir C]

[QUOTE=Sir C;4136277]

You would be correct not to be amazed. p46.

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/stats-services-publications-national-gang-report-2013/view

And let us consider the matter a different way. Were I to say, during the course of an election campaign, that we don't want any more Irish because they get píssed, fight each other, beat up their wives and plant bombs at Harrods, would I be called a racist or would I be cheered to the rafters and carried shoulder high to the House of Lords?

Ban immigration from Canada because they're so dull and they talk funny. Racist, or just good sense?

Hmm?

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136285]

Wasn't the context illegal immigrants? That's what I assumed. Illegal immigrants are criminal by definition, no?

I believe the point was the generally accepted response to Trump, rather than Trump himself. You seem to have fallen into the 'generally accepted' camp of categorising anything he says as racist because he said it, so it must eb racist, because he's a racist, which we know, because he says racist things. Even when he doesn't.

Er, no, that's incorrect. I accused him of making two racist statements involving Mexicans not because he is Donald Trump but because the statements themselves are racist.

[Burney]

[QUOTE=Sir C;4136288]

Er, no, that's incorrect. I accused him of making two racist statements involving Mexicans not because he is Donald Trump but because the statements themselves are racist.

And yet you have utterly failed to demonstrate that the statements are racist.

[Sir C]

[QUOTE=Sir C;4136288]

Er, no, that's incorrect. I accused him of making two racist statements involving Mexicans not because he is Donald Trump but because the statements themselves are racist.

Well then we apparently fundamentally disagree about what constitutes a racist statement.

[TheCurly]

[QUOTE=Burney;4136284]

And let us consider the matter a different way. Were I to say, during the course of an election campaign, that we don't want any more Irish because they get píssed, fight each other, beat up their wives and plant bombs at Harrods, would I be called a racist or would I be cheered to the rafters and carried shoulder high to the House of Lords?

Ban immigration from Canada because they're so dull and they talk funny. Racist, or just good sense?

Hmm?

A good friend of mine (he died a fortnight ago :-( ) was having his single juke box juryed on Saturday Superstore by none other than The Thatch.
She described the song as "boring".You know,only the way a song about escaping the bombs,bullets and sectarianism of Belfast can be thought of as anything else but boring.
Now,SHE was an Irishist

[Norn Iron]

It is indeed. It's like how it's also racist to point out that someone clearly isn't a child or for that matter a refugee when the only excuse for letting them enter the country is that they are a child and/or a refugee. I'm sure Gary Lineker and Lily Allen could explain why doing this makes you a racist, but I'm not sure.

Essentially, I think it's that if someone is poorer and browner than you, then questioning their right to live in your country is racism.

I can't remember Allen or Lineker ever having much sympathy for refugees prior to the referendum. They only started to give a sh*t about them after the referendum and only after the £ crashed. Funny, the pound crashing meant they weren't as wealthy as they once were. They're bitter about the money they've lost due to (mostly) common, white people voting for Brexit. That's why they're running round twitter calling people 'racist idiots'.


They're two c*nts imo.

[Burney]

[QUOTE=Sir C;4136292]

A good friend of mine (he died a fortnight ago :-( ) was having his single juke box juryed on Saturday Superstore by none other than The Thatch.
She described the song as "boring".You know,only the way a song about escaping the bombs,bullets and sectarianism of Belfast can be thought of as anything else but boring.
Now,SHE was an Irishist

She was of the opinion that the Irish are all liars.

I can see where she was coming from, to be fair. :shrug:

[Sir C]

[QUOTE=Sir C;4136292]

A good friend of mine (he died a fortnight ago :-( ) was having his single juke box juryed on Saturday Superstore by none other than The Thatch.
She described the song as "boring".You know,only the way a song about escaping the bombs,bullets and sectarianism of Belfast can be thought of as anything else but boring.
Now,SHE was an Irishist

She never stopped the búggers coming in though, did she? Even after they blew her up.

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136285]

Given that he is speaking in the present tense, that is demonstrably not the case. Indeed, the fact that you seek to interpret it in that way is evidence of your desperation to categorise him as racist for making a fair point about the situation as it currently obtains. Thus you effectively prove the point you are trying to gainsay - namely, that people like you will dismiss as racist anyone who dares to question the status quo on immigration.

QED.

You'd feel better if I changed the statement to 'he assumes the majority of Mexicans who have recently (not sure how you want to define recently in this context) arrived in America are criminals'? You think it's that different? You think that Donald Trump has bothered to check the history of Mexican immigration and made a statement based on some undefined interval only, as opposed to a superficial judgement of the Mexican population in America in general? You think much more of him than I do, Burney.

Your next two statements are logical leaps of truly epics proportions. I'm not sure where to start pulling them apart, so I won't.

[TheCurly]

[QUOTE=TheCurly;4136296]

She was of the opinion that the Irish are all liars.

I can see where she was coming from, to be fair. :shrug:

It's called exaggerating for dramatic effect,b

[Burney]

[QUOTE=TheCurly;4136296]

She never stopped the búggers coming in though, did she? Even after they blew her up.

She did express bemusement at the fact that, for people happy to tell you how awful England and the English are, an awful lot of them seemed oddly happy to live here.

[TheCurly]

[QUOTE=TheCurly;4136296]

She never stopped the búggers coming in though, did she? Even after they blew her up.

Oh btw
JC sent me a DM about my O'Reilly tweet :cloud9:

[Sir C]

[QUOTE=Sir C;4136299]

Oh btw
JC sent me a DM about my O'Reilly tweet :cloud9:

Really? I say, touched by greatness, c. It was rather funny.

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136293]

And yet you have utterly failed to demonstrate that the statements are racist.

You think his statement that a Hispanic judge could not rule impartially because he's Hispanic is not a racist statement?

[TheCurly]

[QUOTE=TheCurly;4136303]

Really? I say, touched by greatness, c. It was rather funny.

Printed and hanging on my fridge next to a picture of the Major :proud:

[Sir C]

[QUOTE=Sir C;4136304]

Printed and hanging on my fridge next to a picture of the General :proud:

Tell us what he said c. We won't tell anyone.

[World's End Stella]

Have to say, I'm slightly worried that I appear to be replacing Jorge WCHE on this thread.

It makes me feel dirty :-(

[Burney]

[QUOTE=Burney;4136291]

You'd feel better if I changed the statement to 'he assumes the majority of Mexicans who have recently (not sure how you want to define recently in this context) arrived in America are criminals'? You think it's that different? You think that Donald Trump has bothered to check the history of Mexican immigration and made a statement based on some undefined interval only, as opposed to a superficial judgement of the Mexican population in America in general? You think much more of him than I do, Burney.

Your next two statements are logical leaps of truly epics proportions. I'm not sure where to start pulling them apart, so I won't.

Let's go through it, shall we?

"When Mexico sends it people, they're not sending their best." - True. As Sir C says, not many doctors, lawyers or injun chiefs in that lot.
"They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with [them]. - All true. You don't try and get smuggled into the US if things are going swimmingly south of the border.
"They're bringing drugs." True. Drug and people smuggling are intrinsically linked.
"They're bringing crime." True. Illegal immigrant gangs do make up a disproportionate amount of crime in the Southwestern United States.
"They're rapists." True. Some among them are indeed rapists.
"And some, I assume, are good people" True, I guess.

There isn't a single statement in that lot that isn't founded in truth. So where exactly is the racism other than in your interpretation?

[TheCurly]

[QUOTE=TheCurly;4136306]

Tell us what he said c. We won't tell anyone.

Well,for a start he didn't call the Major the General :-(
He did mention Stubbs coming in to sort out the mess

[Ash]

Have to say, I'm slightly worried that I appear to be replacing Jorge WCHE on this thread.

It makes me feel dirty :-(

I'm just relieved that there's a post without the broken quote tags causing people to be MISQUOTED. It's untidy and wrong. :-(

The thread was broken in this post:

http://www.awimb.com/showthread.php?596864-One-of-these-Trump-things-about-which-there-is-considerable-outrage&p=4136272&viewfull=1#post4136272

[Pokster]

I'm just relieved that there's a post without the broken quote tags causing people to be MISQUOTED. It's untidy and wrong. :-(

The thread was broken in this post:

http://www.awimb.com/showthread.php?596864-One-of-these-Trump-things-about-which-there-is-considerable-outrage&p=4136272&viewfull=1#post4136272

It's all these bloody foreign types coming over here and breaking our threads

[Burney]

[QUOTE=Burney;4136294]

You think his statement that a Hispanic judge could not rule impartially because he's Hispanic is not a racist statement?

It's no more or less racist than many of the things Black Lives Matter activists say all the time about the legal system in relation to the acquittal or exoneration of white police officers by white judges or juries. :shrug:

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136300]

Let's go through it, shall we?

"When Mexico sends it people, they're not sending their best." - True. As Sir C says, not many doctors, lawyers or injun chiefs in that lot.
"They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with [them]. - All true. You don't try and get smuggled into the US if things are going swimmingly south of the border.
"They're bringing drugs." True. Drug and people smuggling are intrinsically linked.
"They're bringing crime." True. Illegal immigrant gangs do make up a disproportionate amount of crime in the Southwestern United States.
"They're rapists." True. Some among them are indeed rapists.
"And some, I assume, are good people" True, I guess.

There isn't a single statement in that lot that isn't founded in truth. So where exactly is the racism other than in your interpretation?

I can't be bothered with every statement so I'll just focus on the one I found most amusing:

"They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with [them]. - All true. You don't try and get smuggled into the US if things are going swimmingly south of the border.

Really? So there aren't any illegal Mexican immigrants who are simply looking for work and are honest, hard working people who want security and a better future for them and their family? They all have 'problems and they're bringing them with them'?

:clap:

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136305]

It's no more or less racist than many of the things Black Lives Matter activists say all the time about the legal system in relation to the acquittal or exoneration of white police officers by white judges or juries. :shrug:

Whataboutery - you said I had utterly failed to prove that either statement was racist. You now accept that was incorrect?

[Burney]

[QUOTE=Burney;4136313]

Whataboutery - you said I had utterly failed to prove that either statement was racist. You now accept that was incorrect?

It's not whataboutery, it's clear evidence of a double standard in that the people who call that statement racist must also condemn Black Lives Matter as racist for suggesting the same thing - and never do.

Besides which, it is in no way racist to suggest that someone's cultural or ethnic background could affect their outlook and decision-making process.

[Burney]

[QUOTE=Burney;4136309]

I can't be bothered with every statement so I'll just focus on the one I found most amusing:

"They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with [them]. - All true. You don't try and get smuggled into the US if things are going swimmingly south of the border.

Really? So there aren't any illegal Mexican immigrants who are simply looking for work and are honest, hard working people who want security and a better future for them and their family? They all have 'problems and they're bringing them with them'?

:clap:

He clearly covers that eventuality in 'and some, I assume, are good people'. Still no racism.

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136315]

It's not whataboutery, it's clear evidence of a double standard in that the people who call that statement racist must also condemn Black Lives Matter as racist for suggesting the same thing - and never do.

Besides which, it is in no way racist to suggest that someone's cultural or ethnic background could affect their outlook and decision-making process.

Don't be absurd, of course it's whataboutery and you know it.

Judges are paid to be impartial and objective and intelligent in the execution of their responsibilities. Donald Trump made it clear that a particular judge was unable to do that because of his race. That, by any sensible decision, is racism.

[Alberto Balsam Rodriguez]

I believe he suggested Google.

Google says meh

[Burney]

[QUOTE=Burney;4136316]

Don't be absurd, of course it's whataboutery and you know it.

Judges are paid to be impartial and objective and intelligent in the execution of their responsibilities. Donald Trump made it clear that a particular judge was unable to do that because of his race. That, by any sensible decision, is racism.

So you are seriously trying to suggest that factors such as sex, political outlook, wealth, upbringing, social background, education, race, religion or class could never influence a judge's decision on an issue close to their heart and that any suggestion that they might is an outrageous slur that, in the case of racial background, instantly constitutes racism?
Laughable nonsense. Suggesting a potential conflict of interests leading to to a lack of impartiality is not racism. It may not be correct, but it isn't racism and if that's the best argument you've got for Trump being a racist, it's appallingly weak.
The example of black people arguing that white judges and juries are not impartial in cases involving black people was used to illustrate this fact. People may not agree with the suggestion of bias, but nobody - NOBODY - ever calls it racist. Why not? Because nobody in their right mind believes it is. And if it isn't, neither is what Trump said.

[World's End Stella]

[QUOTE=World's End Stella;4136318]

So you are seriously trying to suggest that factors such as sex, political outlook, wealth, upbringing, social background, education, race, religion or class could never influence a judge's decision on an issue close to their heart and that any suggestion that they might is an outrageous slur that, in the case of racial background, instantly constitutes racism?
Laughable nonsense. Suggesting a potential conflict of interests leading to to a lack of impartiality is not racism. It may not be correct, but it isn't racism and if that's the best argument you've got for Trump being a racist, it's appallingly weak.
The example of black people arguing that white judges and juries are not impartial in cases involving black people was used to illustrate this fact. People may not agree with the suggestion of bias, but nobody - NOBODY - ever calls it racist. Why not? Because nobody in their right mind believes it is. And if it isn't, neither is what Trump said.

'So you are seriously trying to suggest that factors such as sex, political outlook, wealth, upbringing, social background, education, race, religion or class could never influence a judge's decision on an issue close to their heart and that any suggestion that they might is an outrageous slur that, in the case of racial background, instantly constitutes racism?
Laughable nonsense. Suggesting a potential conflict of interests leading to to a lack of impartiality is not racism.' - all you're really doing here is rationalising his racist statement. He said that a judge could not rule impartially because of his race, he didn't mention sex, political outlook, social background or anything else, he said he couldn't perform the job he is meant to do because of his race. If you think that isn't a racist statement I'd be curious as to what is a racist statement in your world.

'It may not be correct, but it isn't racism and if that's the best argument you've got for Trump being a racist, it's appallingly weak.' - I never said Trump was a racist, I said he made two statements on immigration which I viewed as racist and therefore his views on immigration could not be considered as a rational, logical argument for immigration control.

'The example of black people arguing that white judges and juries are not impartial in cases involving black people was used to illustrate this fact. People may not agree with the suggestion of bias, but nobody - NOBODY - ever calls it racist. Why not? Because nobody in their right mind believes it is. And if it isn't, neither is what Trump said.' - White judges being accused of racism without anyone calling it racism does not in any way preclude one from coming to the conclusion that Donald Trump made a racist statement. For the record, someone claiming that all white judges are incapable of ruling objectively on a case involving a black man would also be guilty of making a racist statement in my view.

[Monty92]

[QUOTE=Monty92;4136218]

This is a reasonable statement on Mexican immigrants, is it Monty? No suggestion of racism in there anywhere, you think?

"When Mexico sends it people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people,"

So no, it's a terrible example.

"Their" rapists or "they're" rapists...........very important distinction

[redgunamo]

No, it's textbook Trumpery. He's fishing, trolling. And he knows your sort always fall for it. You can't help yourselves.

Either we all believe in diversity or we don't. However, when Trump mentions it, he's being racist. As President Obama himself put it "I have transformed the federal courts from a diversity standpoint with a record that’s been unmatched.” A large part of the reason this judge-chap (Curiel?) was appointed in the first place was because of his Mexican heritage. It is this double standard, even hypocrisy, that the Donald is referring to.

"When judges decide cases, there can never be a universal definition of wise, so I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life," as an earlier Obama judicial appointee stated.

Unlike you, people who actually *got* the affirmative action memo and grasped its implications understood perfectly what the Donald meant and instantly, instinctively appreciated the justice and truth in it. Namely that, in the current climate, impartiality and objectivity must kowtow to political correctness. This guy's judicial neutrality is a merely a front; if it weren't, he wouldn't be in that job in the first place. Otherwise, what is the point of Diversity.


Judges are paid to be impartial and objective and intelligent in the execution of their responsibilities. Donald Trump made it clear that a particular judge was unable to do that because of his race. That, by any sensible decision, is racism.