No. In a party of over half a million members there’s bound to be a few pillocks with distasteful views. The point is that they aren’t the ones at the head of the party leading the charge. You can’t easily police the views of every member with an organisation that size, it can only be reactive.

No, not Jews playing the victim. Vested interests playing the victim. Not all Jews think alike, same as not all Christians, Muslims or people from Ullapool think alike.

What petty insults?

Kind of illustrates the point does it not – you see what you want to see.

I personally don’t have much of a persecution complex so am not easily offended. Others seem to have a different persuation.

The thing is, anyone I spoke to about that mural needed it explained to them in fine detail before they could even see what it was they were meant to be offended by. And that includes my wife who has Jewish heritage, of sorts.

Yes, that mural, which if noone had said anything to me I wouldn’t have connected to Jews at all. The rich exploiting the proles is pretty much all there is to it.

They haven’t caricatured a generic Jew on it you know, those are real people, and they arent all Jews. They are all bankers though.

But, you know, if you want to be offended you go ahead.

Hang on, so “international bankers” is an antisemitic phrase? Did you see what I wrote about crying wolf?

Oversensitivity would be to phrases such as the above or murals depicting bankers, only some of whom were Jewish.

Its pretty obvious why comparisons to the Nazis are compelling when talking about Israel; its half of the defence trotted out for the states existence in the first place. Its inevitable, just like godwins law on t’internet!

a couple of articles on Brietbart

Doesn’t give you another proper meaning. Its just the way they use the word. If you kowtow (and that one is almost certainly problematic for some) to it then you legitimise their use and validate them.

The use of the word elite is not anti-semitic. It might be shorthand for some people but that doesn’t change the meaning for everyone else.

I think the reason I’m so uppity about the whole thing is that the constant crying of wolf, and (what I perceive as) over-sensitivity to trivial comments, devalues the genuine problems people face, Jews, Muslims and the rest.

nickc

You don’t need to be an academic scholar to draw comparisons. Things don’t have to be ‘identical’ to be ‘the same’. Comparing the treatment of Palestinians by Israel to Nazi treatment of Jews is not intended to diminish the historical suffering of Jews but is intended to highlight the plight of people living under pretty grotesque conditions. Its a comparison, not an accusation.

The main reason the perpetually offended, and for that matter the BBC and the ‘elites’ (which has nothing to do with Jews but just refers to the privileged) treat it as such is because it either shuts down criticism of their favourite country or it is seen as useful brush with which to tar those that disagree with them on other things.

Gunz

Edit: removed, can’t be bothered.

You clearly belong in the OPs supermarket…

I don’t think you’ll find many people who think its all good and proper to talk about the “mongs” in a special needs school. To be honest you are getting a touch hysterical (a neurotic condition peculiar to women and thought to be caused by a dysfunction of the uterus.).

If someone refers to someone/thing as being “complete ‘something or others'” that would imply that they weren’t actually ‘something or others’ and that it is basically a turn of phrase.

Perhaps it is a crap turn of phrase but it doesn’t warrant the level of wanton indignation expressed above.

Context my dear friend.

In the OP it was almost a text book example of someone describing a group of people with Downs Syndrome in a way that would be most insulting to them.

I don’t think he was referring to people with actual downs syndrome though was he. He was just talking about general morons (A person of borderline intelligence in the former classification of mental retardation, having an intelligence quotient of 50-69), cretins (A person who fails to develop mentally and physically due to a congenital hypothyroidism.) and other wastrels was he not?

like Queer – I think a group of people taking ownership of a word and turning it into something positive isn’t necessarily a bad thing. The way a lot of rappers use the N word isn’t about trying to use it in a positive way it’s just become lazy – so they’re not racists, just falling into a stereotype.

Still using the word though aren’t they, which is what your problem was with ‘other’ words. So, it seems its OK to use such words in some contexts but not others, is that right? So, does someone have the right to be offended if such words are used in a ‘positive way’ if they don’t deem it to be acceptable or would such a person be a bit of a fool (etymology – pejorative A person with poor judgement or little intelligence.)?

wwaswas – Clearly there are limits. Doesn’t change the facts. Context innit.

By your logic, presumably all the rappers (and others)  that do use the ‘N’ word are hideous racists and should be stopped?

Oh, and as for daytime zombies, if you want the full experience I suggest a stroll round Hyde of a lunchtime. Truly extraordinary levels of weird going on in those parts.

Well, this one always seems a bit ridiculous to me. If you’ve ever called anyone hysterical, for instance, then you are in no position to criticise. How about sinister? Very offensive to left handed people that you raging xenophobe.

Words are words. If you get offended by a word it doesn’t mean the author has intent, and if the context is quite obviously not with intent, it says rather a lot more about the offendee than the user of the “terrible word”.

Did have John Lewis Bband but decided it was too expensive.

Been with thephone.coop for the last few years. Cant fault it. Fast and good customer service. Uses talktalk, same as sky so you get free of BT too!

Nordisk Rago 4.

https://nordisk.eu/rago-4-pu/dusty-green/p/89/

2 or 4 man, as you wish…

Personally, I find it surprising that some people are surprised that people seem surprised that some folk’ll nick anything.

Someone once broke into my wife’s car and stole some waterproof trousers. Nothing else. Wierdos.

It clearly did need a thread because I dont care enough about snowboarding to find the bbc articles otherwise.

So the consensus is wimmin are more afflicted with wind than men.

Well, i only watched about half an hour of each and I don’t remember seeing many men fall and I haven’t seen a single clean women’s run. Genuinely perplexed.

If its the wind that’s fair enough but not being a snowboard aficionado i don’t know if its normal or not!

Thank me later.

I love cbeebies.

Anyone not with bulb? Heh.

“Road in the hole”? A kind of inverse pothole?

In case anyone else is of the mind to switch…

Couple of months in and it’s cheaper and greener.

” you may also want some 90° Angle HDMI adapters”

But surely that will turn the picture sideways…

Its the sanctimony i cant take. That somehow by not wearing, or forcing a child to wear, a helmet you are completely irresponsible and actively damaging your/their life.

The worst head injury i ever had was slipping on ice and smashing the back of my head into the tarmac, another couple on hills. Not once ever riding a bike, and i’ve fallen off a few times.

I was recently in minor injuries after a very minor off in which I damaged my thumb. First question from the nurse was ridiculously about whether or not i was wearing a helmet. What the **** does that have to do with the ailment i am presenting with?

As for my lad, i’d rather he learn that falling off isn’t a great idea and learn to ride properly rather than presuming some magical protection from the polystyrene gods.

Not really surprising its relateable to pretty much everyone as it seems to describe ‘normal’ western existence.

Everyone needs to have some sort of condition these days…

Its definitely not the morning anymore. I checked…

I thought they were called ‘private plates’, despite the fact that they are very public.

Nothing makes sense anymore.

thegreatape – if its no effort, go for it.

I’ll have to wait til i get my grubby mitts on the new car before i can actually try anything out mind…

Similar to nico, what the flip is a ‘cherished plate’?

Euphemism for ‘massive waste of cash’?

Massively ham-fisted you say… Don’t misunderestimate me.

I think they’re the type rickos suggesting. Given the potential for damage/injury when your hanging stuff off your roof on the motorway, I might pass on any DIY modifications…

Bugger.

The step is 135cm to 118cm apparently. Sounds like a bit too much of a squeeze.

So a cyclist gets chased by an aggressive dog and its their “fault for not behaving differently??” – see the point yet?

If you let your dog off the lead once its wound up/scared by such an encounter what happens when it meets some other scary thing in its path, such as a cyclist? You have no control over your potentially dangerous animal.

The argument you will now make “but I know my dog wouldn’t hurt anyone, it only ever thinks pure thoughts” is used by every imbecile dog owner to justify why their animal should be allowed free reign to intimidate and annoy everyone else. That some dogs are more dangerous than others doesn’t make a blind bit of difference to the fact that you should be keeping the animal under control.

You’re allowed to dislike multiple persons at any one time you know!

People are what they believe, and if those beliefs are abhorrent to you then that person must also be abhorrent.

Where people make a genuine effort to overcome some nasty deep held prejudice then yeah, they earn some respect. Mogg doesn’t really fall into that category.

Actually jolmes, no. Its very much in the ‘my horse doesn’t like bikes’ category.

Don’t expose it to the things which make it skittish then. In this case, if you can control the thing, don’t take it near other dogs. Now, I can see that might be a tad compromising for dog owner however the alternative is imposing your poorly controlled animal on anyone and everyone else who happens to be in the vicinity.

Pretty much the definition of self centred.

Stoatsbrother – the views/opinions make the man.

We can all tolerate a certain degree of difference from our own viewpoint but there comes a point where that tolerance breaks. The man, in effect, is the ball.

Rees-Mogg is a first class ****, whichever way you spin it.

No mefty, its not trying to pull the wool over your eyes. Different categories overlap, it doesn’t claim that they don’t. That you can’t see past your own assumption of what that site ought to do (in your opinion) is your failing, not that of the site.

This one cracked me up:

anagallis_arvensis – Member
Oh and my dog is walked off lead, at least in part, because she’s nervous of large excitable dogs of which lots have owners who dont seem to care that their dogs run up to and barge around other dogs. Luckily mine is pretty much twice as fast as every other dog.

Self centred attitude on display front and centre – “its the other dogs fault, not mine”. Where does your dog go once its been spooked? In what way are you in control of it? Clearly your dog doesn’t know how to behave around dogs, maybe it needs training?

Any and all dogs can be ‘aggressive’. They naturally invade personal space and think nothing of it. If a person was to behave in the way a dog does they would not be popular. Dog owners typically seem to be incapable of understanding this about their little darlings.

Round our way the amount of shit you encounter along bridleways and tracks is disgusting and argument enough in itself to place more controls on dog ownership, never mind the inconsiderate behaviour on display from time to time.

The long and short of it is there are too many dogs, and too many of those are owned by inconsiderate people who do not control their animals properly.