Offensive posts, compare and contrast; FAO The Fear | Page 3 | Vital Football

Offensive posts, compare and contrast; FAO The Fear

Trashbat

Vital Squad Member
#41
Buddha's post is worrying.
It underscores the lengths some people will go to stifle free speech.
It merits early and firm rebuttal.


In what universe is this passage offensive ?
Surely it is "fair comment" ? (As Buddha breaks it down later, so will I)

By contrast "offensive" comment No.1 wished ill on an individual.
Some might construe that as "incitement to violence".


Assertion and opinion.


Again, assertion and opinion.
No attempt is made to explain "why" those words are "offensive"....
....or and implies that "all" of the "great many people" are offended.



Being "offended" on behalf of other people before those other people have expressed their own opinion is one of the scourges of Politically Correct censors.
e.g. Assuming that Muslims would be insulted by "Christmas".
Most Muslims seem to love a good knees up during those dark, miserable days !!

No attempt is made to explain why a comment on "culture" and "values" can only be interpreted as "racism" or "xenophobia".


"Culture" does not equal "race".
There are plenty of "cultures" within the UK, that some people like and others dislike (and many not bothered).
They may or may not express approval / disapproval.
Caribbean culture is different from West African culture - which is different form other parts of Africa.
Mediterranean culture is different form Scandi culture etc, etc,etc.

How is it wrong to say:
"With different cultures , came different values." ?
Let's debate whether those "different values" amount to much - but surely it is absurd to deny this as a "fact" ?

".....wasn't asked if they want it , or even consulted."
Surely this is a "fact" ?

Does it not matter if there is an imposition on people ?
This applies whether it around expressing a view .... or that a "culture" is somehow "imposed". (Surely that is a legitimate discussion - whatever "culture" we are talking about ? Not everyone appreciates football!!! )



A) " a great deal more members" is pure supposition - is an appeal to emotion.

B) "more offensive" still has not been explained but ...

C) .... should be irrelevant - if we have Free Speech (supposedly !)
As Nick Clegg told Nick Ferrari:
"No one has a right not to be offended".
(Incitement to violence, to commit a crime are explicit limitations on Free Speech.)



"context" "look a little deeper".
Go on then, do so - otherwise this remains just innuendo - another "appeal to emotion".

How is "vile rhetoric" not highly emotive ?
And unjustified.

"deliberately designed".... Supposition - and surely "emotive" ?



"Full of...." ? Isn't that "emotive" ?

Is "social experiment" "emotive" ? And if so, "bad" or "good" emotive ?
Surely it depends if you think "social experiments" are mostly good - or mostly bad ?

How about the "social experiment" on 12 y/o - shown on Channel 4 last Thursday - entitled:
"The School that tried to end racism" ?
Now that was "emotive".
i.e. The "experiment", not the description

"Multicultural paradise" is emotive.
Surely a "paradise" is intended to invoke pleasure ?
But here, there may be sarcasm. So what ?

Critics could easily point out that here, VG uses "argument by extreme".
Instead the motive behind the criticism seems censorious.


"No basis in truth fact ....?"
Which bits of VG's statement ?

By all means challenge something as "incorrect" (all-be-it prefaced by the emotive "perpetuate"...!!)
But tagging with "racist interpretation of history" is not only an assertion, it is an insulting one - intended to bully people into not discussing the matter.

It seems pretty obvious from the numbers that recent decades have shown MUCH larger numbers of immigrants.
In the 18th Century, around 50,000 Hugenots escaped persecution in France (many to Medway) .... over a decade.

Currently, 50,000 is about 2 months' worth of new arrivals.

So where are the counter "facts" ?

What is "racist" or "xenophobic" about discussing "culture and values" ?


This post is nothing more than a carefully crafted whinge:
- full of assertions and insulting innuendo
- full of "emotive language" while hypocritically criticising "emotive language"
.......to justify censorship. :mad:
I’m guessing you don’t have a Twitter account.
 

Rob_b100

Vital Reserves Team
#42
Some really good posts and opinions here everyone. I must admit I said when it happened that I didn’t want Wayne banned permanently. That is still the case, but he’s gotta tone it down and chill a little. The board since his banning has been a much more amiable place.

By all means put a poll up (I would vote to reinstate him) but if unbanning him is the overwhelming consensus then I still think an apology is due. And I can’t see him behaving for ever either..........
 

Baghdad_Rob

Vital Squad Member
#43
I'll restate the point I made at the time. Wayne got banned because he annoyed the mods and doubled down implying the mod was taking things out of context and therefore the mod was in the wrong.

If Wayne wants to come back he really needs to apologise to the mods and convince The Fear that he will behave in future. If The Fear keeps unblocking him because the forum keeps doing a poll then there is zero incentive for Wayne to learn to tone it down a bit.
 

Tarian

Vital Squad Member
#44
I have read and reread your post several times pal... and I have absolutely no idea on what you are going on about :blah::blah:
You're joking aren't you ......?

You said:
"What i find slightly amusing is Valencia’s post is taking aim at people moving to the UK and the indigenous population not being consulted .....
..... he himself lives in a different country ....
..... did he consult the indigenous population over there before moving out there ????
"

Surely you have seen the many accusations that those who wish to discuss (and probably control ) immigration are hostile to foreigners - e.g. are "racists" and "xenophobes" ?
(The OP being an example)

I appreciate that you did not go on to suggest VG "dislikes foreigners as individuals......." - but others have.
....And conflating mass immigration with individual migrants risks the appearance of alignment with those who would shut down debate by implying "racist" motives.
 

Tarian

Vital Squad Member
#46
But I think he is no more offensive than valencia and it just doesn't seem fair to me that one should be banned but not the other.

Even though I find valencia's political views to be abhorrent .
"no more offensive than Valencia"
STILL attacking the person not the argument.

STILL using extreme words like "abhorrent" ....without a credible example and explanation to back it up.

Earlier I said that I didn't want you banned .... but you really are stretching tolerance to the limit !
 
#47
You're joking aren't you ......?

You said:
"What i find slightly amusing is Valencia’s post is taking aim at people moving to the UK and the indigenous population not being consulted .....
..... he himself lives in a different country ....
..... did he consult the indigenous population over there before moving out there ????
"

Surely you have seen the many accusations that those who wish to discuss (and probably control ) immigration are hostile to foreigners - e.g. are "racists" and "xenophobes" ?
(The OP being an example)

I appreciate that you did not go on to suggest VG "dislikes foreigners as individuals......." - but others have.
....And conflating mass immigration with individual migrants risks the appearance of alignment with those who would shut down debate by implying "racist" motives.
nope not joking mate ..... and you’ve done the double now by doubling the confusion .....
 

Buddha

Vital 1st Team Regular
#48
"no more offensive than Valencia"
STILL attacking the person not the argument.

STILL using extreme words like "abhorrent" ....without a credible example and explanation to back it up.

Earlier I said that I didn't want you banned .... but you really are stretching tolerance to the limit !
Just googled the definition of 'abhorrent'. It is, "inspiring disgust and loathing; repugnant."

This comment disgusted me, I found it repugnant:
"And someone decided that Britain was to become a social experiment , a multicultural paradise. With different cultures , came different values. The indigenous population wasn't asked if they want it , or even consulted. From the seeds sewn back then , we are now beginning to reap the harvest. "

I was disgusted because I think it is a gross misrepresentation of history. Nobody decided that, "Britain was to become a social experiment". You keep demanding a credible example and explanation from me but what about valencia? Does he not have to offer any credible examples or explanations to back up his assertions?

I also found his use of the word, 'indigenous' to be pretty disgusting. What indigenous population is he referring to? There is no indigenous population. We are all immigrants if we trace our ancestry back far enough.

The entire tone of his post (as well as plenty others in the past) was, imo, disgusting, loathsome and repugnant. Or, as I said before, abhorrent.

More not very subtle innuendo.

If you don't understand something, you can always ask for clarification.
Ask you for clarification?! No thanks, I don't think I could bear it.
 
Last edited:

wxgill

Vital Squad Member
#51
I have to say i don;t agree with a lot that VG and WK say but they do add something to this board. They get people talking.

I wish WK was a bit less rude and VG a bit less DELIBERATELY provocative.

This board often makes me smile and it's been "something nice" in these horrible times.

Although i sometime think what the hell i rather like Budda's stuff. He also admits when he's wrong which is admirable.

I wish AK would post more often as he's probably one of the most balanced on this board.

I also wish Tarion would not keep posting very long posts. I'm not very bright and i forget the meaning of a thread if it goes on too long.

Wishing you all well in this difficult time.

WX / Deal Gill.
 

Buddha

Vital 1st Team Regular
#52
You'd better ask Buddha , it's his thread 😉
Not my thread, I started it but that doesn't make it mine. As with all the threads on here, they're everyones.

For what it's worth, I don't reckon nitram is a dickhead.

Although i sometime think what the hell i rather like Budda's stuff. He also admits when he's wrong which is admirable.
.
Thanks, Wx.

I often worry that I piss people on here off. I don't want to do that and if I felt I was I'd simply stop posting.

But the negative feedback I ever get comes from two or three posters who, quite frankly, if I am pissing off it would suggest that I'm doing the right thing and must continue.
 

Tarian

Vital Squad Member
#53
Thank goodness. You appear to be learning how to debate......:innocent:
I was disgusted because I think it is a gross misrepresentation of history.
Better. The beginnings of a reason.

Nobody decided that, "Britain was to become a social experiment". You keep demanding a credible example and explanation from me but what about valencia?
Does he not have to offer any credible examples or explanations to back up his assertions?
"Yes" to the last sentence.
You've asked VG to explain "social experiment" - which is fair enough.

Let's discuss whether any sort of "social experiment" has been going on.
Let's discuss whether "someone" - or more likely a group of people "decided" on one.

Personally, I think it # less of an "experiment" - and more political gerrymandering.
(# I've already made clear that I'm not commenting on postwar / Windrush - but more recent, large scale migration - and "multiculturalism".)

Either way, why "abhorrent" or "disgusted" ??? Really ???


I also found his use of the word, 'indigenous' to be pretty disgusting.
What indigenous population is he referring to? There is no indigenous population. We are all immigrants if we trace our ancestry back far enough.
Again - better - an explanation.

Let's discuss "indigenous".

What's the problem ?
Clearly it is a shorthand for people already here.
(Gosh, I'm "interpreting" - just not assuming the worst !)


Personally I find the way that people look for "racism" and "xenophobia" around every corner - in every phrase - pretty "disgusting".
In fact adding "-phobia" to anything less than fulsome support is "disgusting".

Why ? Because it seems like an attempt to bully people into silence on even the mildest comment.


There.
We've started a civilised discussion.
Would you like to respond ? :fish:
 

Tarian

Vital Squad Member
#54
I have to say i don;t agree with a lot that VG and WK say but they do add something to this board. They get people talking.

I wish WK was a bit less rude and VG a bit less DELIBERATELY provocative.

This board often makes me smile and it's been "something nice" in these horrible times.

Although i sometime think what the hell i rather like Budda's stuff. He also admits when he's wrong which is admirable.

I wish AK would post more often as he's probably one of the most balanced on this board.

I also wish Tarion would not keep posting very long posts. I'm not very bright and i forget the meaning of a thread if it goes on too long.

Wishing you all well in this difficult time.

WX / Deal Gill.
Sorry.
But if I'm accusing someone (e.g. Buddha) of making unsupported assertions - then a pithy answer could open me up to "hypocrisy".
 

Buddha

Vital 1st Team Regular
#55
Thank goodness. You appear to be learning how to debate......:innocent:

Better. The beginnings of a reason.


"Yes" to the last sentence.
You've asked VG to explain "social experiment" - which is fair enough.

Let's discuss whether any sort of "social experiment" has been going on.
Let's discuss whether "someone" - or more likely a group of people "decided" on one.

Personally, I think it # less of an "experiment" - and more political gerrymandering.
(# I've already made clear that I'm not commenting on postwar / Windrush - but more recent, large scale migration - and "multiculturalism".)

Either way, why "abhorrent" or "disgusted" ??? Really ???



Again - better - an explanation.

Let's discuss "indigenous".

What's the problem ?
Clearly it is a shorthand for people already here.
(Gosh, I'm "interpreting" - just not assuming the worst !)


Personally I find the way that people look for "racism" and "xenophobia" around every corner - in every phrase - pretty "disgusting".
In fact adding "-phobia" to anything less than fulsome support is "disgusting".

Why ? Because it seems like an attempt to bully people into silence on even the mildest comment.


There.
We've started a civilised discussion.
Would you like to respond ? :fish:
Yeah, I'll respond. Eff off, you patronising expletive.
 

Tarian

Vital Squad Member
#56
Yeah, I'll respond. Eff off, you patronising expletive.
Funnily enough, I was about to apologise .... after re-reading my post ....
...and realising that it might come across as either sarcastic or patronising.

But seriously, if you keep making posts like #48 we can have better discussions - on the substance rather than style.
 

Gills 58

Vital 1st Team Regular
#57
I have to say i don;t agree with a lot that VG and WK say but they do add something to this board. They get people talking.

I wish WK was a bit less rude and VG a bit less DELIBERATELY provocative.

This board often makes me smile and it's been "something nice" in these horrible times.

Although i sometime think what the hell i rather like Budda's stuff. He also admits when he's wrong which is admirable.

I wish AK would post more often as he's probably one of the most balanced on this board.

I also wish Tarion would not keep posting very long posts. I'm not very bright and i forget the meaning of a thread if it goes on too long.

Wishing you all well in this difficult time.

WX / Deal Gill.
Re Tarian's posts it isn't you being thick. They are largely drivel dressed up as intellectual arguments. He can read and cut and paste well but doesn't understand much of what he covers. He sees things in a different way to the rest of us, for example he doesn't understand such things as nuance. I one stated why but got told off.

He doesn't mean any harm and isn't deliberately winding people up, unlike VG and his couple of blatant racist co-contributors
 

jogills

Vital 1st Team Regular
#58
Thank goodness. You appear to be learning how to debate......:innocent:

Better. The beginnings of a reason.


"Yes" to the last sentence.
You've asked VG to explain "social experiment" - which is fair enough.

Let's discuss whether any sort of "social experiment" has been going on.
Let's discuss whether "someone" - or more likely a group of people "decided" on one.

Personally, I think it # less of an "experiment" - and more political gerrymandering.
(# I've already made clear that I'm not commenting on postwar / Windrush - but more recent, large scale migration - and "multiculturalism".)

Either way, why "abhorrent" or "disgusted" ??? Really ???



Again - better - an explanation.

Let's discuss "indigenous".

What's the problem ?
Clearly it is a shorthand for people already here.
(Gosh, I'm "interpreting" - just not assuming the worst !)


Personally I find the way that people look for "racism" and "xenophobia" around every corner - in every phrase - pretty "disgusting".
In fact adding "-phobia" to anything less than fulsome support is "disgusting".

Why ? Because it seems like an attempt to bully people into silence on even the mildest comment.


There.
We've started a civilised discussion.
Would you like to respond ? :fish:
I do not wish to begin an endless discussion of terms but you do need to apply your own standards to some of your posts, including this one.

Personally, I think it # less of an "experiment" - and more political gerrymandering.
(# I've already made clear that I'm not commenting on postwar / Windrush - but more recent, large scale migration - and "multiculturalism".)

Gerrymandering? Changing boundaries to increase the number of people voting for a particular party. Are you saying Labour favours immigration to increase the Labour vote? A dubious proposition in any event.

Multiculturalism? You use it in much the same way your opponents use the terms you object to. Blair did not invent the term, the practice, or the concept.

These sort of arguments are tedious and do not improve understanding. I'm more swayed by your comment on the use of phobia as a suffix for instance, which seems more of a gut reaction.
 

Tarian

Vital Squad Member
#59
Re Tarian's posts it isn't you being thick. They are largely drivel dressed up as intellectual arguments.
I'll cut and paste Buddha's response:
Yeah, I'll respond. Eff off, you patronising expletive.
He can read and cut and paste well but doesn't understand much of what he covers.
That's insulting - and implies I "cut and paste" a lot. i.e. without "disclosing".

I've been debating some of this stuff for decades - and had to justify a position on countless occasions.
Some of the false assumptions on here are, (to put it mildly) "disappointing".
If I can challenge surely you can too ?

Or perhaps it is you that "doesn't understand" rebuttals or challenges that are unfamiliar in the SJW bubble ??:oops:

He sees things in a different way to the rest of us, for example he doesn't understand such things as nuance.
Again - it is you who "don't understand".
Lack of nuance is one of my principle gripes on this board.

If someone criticises Political Correctness or mass immigration, questions aspects of Islam (e.g. treatment of women), certain people on here shout "waycist".
Apparently "Thatcher destroyed British Industry" - numerous times !
Where's the nuance in that ???

He doesn't mean any harm and isn't deliberately winding people up...
.... unlike VG and his couple of blatant racist co-contributors
There you go.
Describing someone as "blatant racist".
Where's the "nuance" ?
 

Trashbat

Vital Squad Member
#60
Re Tarian's posts it isn't you being thick. They are largely drivel dressed up as intellectual arguments. He can read and cut and paste well but doesn't understand much of what he covers. He sees things in a different way to the rest of us, for example he doesn't understand such things as nuance. I one stated why but got told off.

He doesn't mean any harm and isn't deliberately winding people up, unlike VG and his couple of blatant racist co-contributors
Seconded. I always scroll past Tarian’s posts. He reminds me of Grandpa Simpson.