Visit Leicestershire
From the Advertising Where You Live challenge. See all 430 entries (closed)
( , Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:20, archived)
From the Advertising Where You Live challenge. See all 430 entries (closed)
( , Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:20, archived)
Age is irrelevant...
...there is no excuse for reading that sort of shit.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:23,
archived)
Next time you do something racist
make sure it is funny/good/has some redeeming features.
That way people won't think you are so much of a cunt.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:28,
archived)
That way people won't think you are so much of a cunt.
Ignore
the right ons. Publishing facts doesn't make you a racist. Bigotry works both ways.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:27,
archived)
Let some facts speak for themselves
Population of Leicestershire* = 909,000
Ethnicity of Leicestershire* = 85% white
So, if 15% of 909,00 is 300,000 then LE7 is clearly not racist, merely publishing facts.
On the other hand...
(*including Leicester)
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 23:10,
archived)
Ethnicity of Leicestershire* = 85% white
So, if 15% of 909,00 is 300,000 then LE7 is clearly not racist, merely publishing facts.
On the other hand...
(*including Leicester)
Leicester - home of the National Front!
I think that would have made a better mockery of Liecestershire.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:27,
archived)
Be
like a newspaper. Why let facts get in the way of a comment?
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:36,
archived)
So what you are implying is that it's okay
to mock Leicester for the size of it's 'immigrant' sector - because this is fact.
And that John Tydall who formed the National Front from the influencial Leicester Branch during the 70s is actually a good thing even though this is also a fact.
If you say bigorty can work both ways try to see both side of the argument.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:41,
archived)
And that John Tydall who formed the National Front from the influencial Leicester Branch during the 70s is actually a good thing even though this is also a fact.
If you say bigorty can work both ways try to see both side of the argument.
But
I only see *my* side. By definition.
It would seem that lots of people have already seen one particular side. He has been vilified for this view - maybe correctly.
Having said that, maybe the replies are indicative of people posting replies they feel expected to make.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:46,
archived)
It would seem that lots of people have already seen one particular side. He has been vilified for this view - maybe correctly.
Having said that, maybe the replies are indicative of people posting replies they feel expected to make.
I feel your defence of his posting
seems to imply that you support his feelings. I'm not condeming what he's saying only that in all fairness Leicester has a shit repution for being the home of many racists too.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:49,
archived)
How the fuck to you derive McCarthyism
from what I'm saying?
This is typical of knee-jerk reactionism instead of listening to reasoned debate you jump to wild conclusions about gagging freedom of speech for fuck's sake listen to yourself, and you will see it's you trying to censor my opinion not me censoring his or your opinion.
I'm doing what you said - stating the facts (the NF grew out of Leicester - fact!)
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:55,
archived)
This is typical of knee-jerk reactionism instead of listening to reasoned debate you jump to wild conclusions about gagging freedom of speech for fuck's sake listen to yourself, and you will see it's you trying to censor my opinion not me censoring his or your opinion.
I'm doing what you said - stating the facts (the NF grew out of Leicester - fact!)
This is nothing
to do with "freedom of speech". It is to do with how you interpret my "defending" (none occurred) of the OP's comments.
You effectively called me a racist for my posts in what you perceived as "support" for the OP.
No one is trying to censor anyone here, except for pointing a finger and crying "racist". As you are now more likely to be arrested for racism than possession of a class "c" drug, I think this is quite important.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 19:05,
archived)
You effectively called me a racist for my posts in what you perceived as "support" for the OP.
No one is trying to censor anyone here, except for pointing a finger and crying "racist". As you are now more likely to be arrested for racism than possession of a class "c" drug, I think this is quite important.
I never called anybody a racist - please re-read all my previous comments -
that's your interpretation of my stating the fact that the NF was born out of Leicester.
I'm not calling you a fucking racist, however you have labelled me a McCarthyist. I am however an unaligned free-thinking Socialist and being called a McCarthyist who was a Right-Wing bastard who censored all but right-wing bigotry I find that deeply deeply offensive.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 19:11,
archived)
I'm not calling you a fucking racist, however you have labelled me a McCarthyist. I am however an unaligned free-thinking Socialist and being called a McCarthyist who was a Right-Wing bastard who censored all but right-wing bigotry I find that deeply deeply offensive.
Good man!
haha
You are a man aren't you I wouldn't want to make any sweeping generalisations just in case I get accused of being a McCarthyist.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:56,
archived)
You are a man aren't you I wouldn't want to make any sweeping generalisations just in case I get accused of being a McCarthyist.
I think
you might be better looking up what effect McCarthy had in the US before making posts like this, which make no sense in the context of McCarthy.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 19:08,
archived)
Fuck off, troll
Don't try to make it out your more intelligent than me and fob me off by telling me to read up on McCarthyism. I've done that a long time ago, love, and I know what McCarthy was about. It is you who is using it out of context by labelling anybody who disagrees with you as a McCarthyist.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 19:15,
archived)
Why
is this racist?
A racist post is one that would say "all black people are horrible". This post simply states facts. What is wrong with you people?
Maybe you are racist because you give this a negative connotation?
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:38,
archived)
A racist post is one that would say "all black people are horrible". This post simply states facts. What is wrong with you people?
Maybe you are racist because you give this a negative connotation?
Urm..
because the compo is basically being interpreted as "state how your town is shit"
Thus this post infers that leicester is shit because of its immigrant population, and is therefore racist. It's not fucking rocket science.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:41,
archived)
Thus this post infers that leicester is shit because of its immigrant population, and is therefore racist. It's not fucking rocket science.
Think about how a "reasonable person" would interpret the OP
I very much doubt whether any "positive" or "humourous" defence would wash.
Jingoism? Nope (which is externalised, not internalised chauvinism).
Carry on the debate but truly you are on a hiding on this one. I'll defend the OPers right to post but reserve right to call a spadist a spadist. If it dies like a swan, it's probably H5N51. QEfuckingD.
You are a demi-troll, AICMFP
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 19:30,
archived)
Jingoism? Nope (which is externalised, not internalised chauvinism).
Carry on the debate but truly you are on a hiding on this one. I'll defend the OPers right to post but reserve right to call a spadist a spadist. If it dies like a swan, it's probably H5N51. QEfuckingD.
You are a demi-troll, AICMFP
Knee-jerk reaction to the word "ethnics"
Mainly because people who use the word use it in a negative way. May not always be true, in the same way that shaven-headed blokes with union jack T-shirts aren't always vicious, bigoted thugs.
Ironically, if LE7'd used the word "darkies", people probably wouldn't have been so upset. Or not. Meh, I don't know.
( ,
Thu 6 Apr 2006, 18:43,
archived)
Ironically, if LE7'd used the word "darkies", people probably wouldn't have been so upset. Or not. Meh, I don't know.