That's not the point and you know it.
Nothing about this case is discrimination due to their race, ethnicity, colour, whether their fucking wedding dresses light up like blackpool, or any of that.

they are being "discriminated" against for breaking the law. All the rest is just the populace and the press being cunts, which I dislike as much as you do, but it doesn't change the facts of the case
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:09, 1 reply, 14 years ago)

See, pretty much everything I've written up there^ in response to Kroney and others.
I haven't the energy to type it all again, but if you don't think there's widespread prejudice against travellers, you live in a different, and much nicer world than I.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:22, Reply)

That's what I said in the last line
There are widespread prejudices. That is very unpleasant. Those prejudices have absolutely nothing to do with the legality or execution of this case. And those that claim they are being evicted because they are gypsies and it's flat persecution, are, frankly, as bad as those that are prejudiced against gypsies in the first place.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:24, Reply)

it does beg the question of WHY so many people hate them though
i have never had any experience with them personally, as i've never lived anywhere near an encampment, although i've had a few clients whose land has been unbelievably trashed afterwards.

is it that their way of living is very unpleasant for the people who live around wherever they have chosen to set up camp? and if so, how much of this is accurate, and how much an exaggeration of a mild inconvenience and fear of the unknown?
( rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:30, Reply)

The problem as with all groups of people is that the negative aspects of that group are reported far more than the positive.

( girlinthehole, Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:34, Reply)

This
We have a large authorised site in Liverpool and it is completely fine and dandy. There was another unauthorised camp on the site of a former warehouse and some of their dogs escaped and attacked Nana.
She still takes as she finds and realises that they were not nice people who couldn't control their dogs. She didn't judge the whole camp and she's still supportive of the authorised camp and the very nice people who live there. They're a part of our community.
( Roota zweeeeeoooooowm, Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:44, Reply)

*proffers membership of B3ta Communist Party*
Blousie deals with new members
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:52, Reply)

Sorry, getting worn out by replying to this and missed the last bit.
I don't claim it's simple persecution and it was not my intention to make this point.

However, given that this case includes elements of discretion (such as the decision whether to retroactively grant planning permission) it seems a little strong to claim you know for a fact that the people involved were not in anyway swayed be prejudices you agree they may have had.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:31, Reply)

I have a reasonable level of faith in the multiple courts in the UK that have been involved
I'm not saying the council aren't biased to fuck - they're Tory after all - but this decision has been through pretty much every court in the land. That's good enough for me.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:33, Reply)

Glad you're happy.
FWIW, I have a reasonable level of faith in the courts of this country too, I'm just glad I'm not black or any other minotity as the evidence is that is had to go through them, I would not do as well is I were.

Edited for clarity.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Thu 20 Oct 2011, 12:40, Reply)