Reply to: Cameron: State multiculturalism has failed

[Churchill]

You'd really risk your life for king charles?

I'd risk my life for the Monarchy. There is a difference

[snaw]

It's fine, I'll see you on the battlefield when you try to overthrow the Monarchy.

You'd really risk your life for king charles?

[lilelvis2000]

Has your spade finally worn out?

Is it hard to shovel when you have one foot in the mouth?

[sasguru]

Has your spade finally worn out?

I think it melted when it hit the molten rock at the centre of the earth.
Talk about pig-headedness.

[Spacecadet]

Now continue all you like but I'm going to leave it there.

Has your spade finally worn out?

[Old Greg]

My statement was not anti-semitic. I fully understand your posting but do you not see that it is your interpretation, not everybody elses?

You didn't post your original "and there's that thing about the Jews" to attack anti-semitism you posted it as an attack on me. That attack has failed because my original post was not anti-semtic and I add again that I am not an anti-semitist.

Now continue all you like but I'm going to leave it there.

By all means leave it there. I will also leave it there, but I am genuinely deeply puzzled. And a little depressed about what passes for not being anti-semitic. Funny old world.

[Churchill]

Can you really not see? Honestly, not as a debating point? Because you're not stupid. Are you actually astonished that someone reasonable (and I do know what the come-back is on that) might read those words and think that you're anti-semitic?

But, here we go:

It is not a good thing to be 'in it for themselves' and to see Gentiles as 'to be used' - it is a pretty negative view-point to think that people are like this. It is also not reasonable to extrapolate from you your own experience, that because Jewish people that you know in this company are 'like that', then Jewish people in general are like that.

What you have done is to apply this negative view-point to a people, which is prejudice.

My statement was not anti-semitic. I fully understand your posting but do you not see that it is your interpretation, not everybody elses?

You didn't post your original "and there's that thing about the Jews" to attack anti-semitism you posted it as an attack on me. That attack has failed because my original post was not anti-semitic and I add again that I am not an anti-semitist.

Now continue all you like but I'm going to leave it there.

[Old Greg]

I'll bet you 50p it isn't.

Can I have my 10% cut, now?

[Old Greg]

And where is my predjudice against Jews and where particular in my statement?

Can you really not see? Honestly, not as a debating point? Because you're not stupid. Are you actually astonished that someone reasonable (and I do know what the come-back is on that) might read those words and think that you're anti-semitic?

But, here we go:

It is not a good thing to be 'in it for themselves' and to see Gentiles as 'to be used' - it is a pretty negative view-point to think that people are like this. It is also not reasonable to extrapolate from you your own experience, that because Jewish people that you know in this company are 'like that', then Jewish people in general are like that.

What you have done is to apply this negative view-point to a people, which is prejudice.

[sasguru]

I'm discussing the issue with the original poster, not someone who has decided to join the fray to try and make himself look good.

You're failing miserably, now kindly stop interrupting.

When you originally made the statements, I nominated you for Village Idiot of the Day, a title you are proving to have fully earned.

[Churchill]

Try to address the issue instead of side-stepping it.
Your comments are there in black and white.
They are pretty clear and unambiguous.

End of story.

I'm discussing the issue with the original poster, not someone who has decided to join the fray to try and make himself look good.

You're failing miserably, now kindly stop interrupting.

[Mich the Tester]

End of story.

I'll bet you 50p it isn't.

[sasguru]

You're not here to add anything of import so why bother posting?

Try to address the issue instead of side-stepping it.
Your comments are there in black and white.
They are pretty clear and unambiguous.

End of story.

[Churchill]

I do know something of your view of Jewish people. I know that you think:

If you are not anti-semitic (and I have sai I accept I may be wrong) can you not see how you are likely to appear anti-semitic with that statement?

I would define anti-semitism as prejudice against Jewish people.

And where is my predjudice against Jews and where particular in my statement?

[Old Greg]

You don't know what my view is of Jewish people. You've made an assumption and I've told you that your assumption is wrong.



In the interest of closing this altogether. What is your definition of "anti-semitism"?

I do know something of your view of Jewish people. I know that you think:

'They're in it for themselves. If you're a Gentile you're there to be used.'

If you are not anti-semitic (and I have sai I accept I may be wrong) can you not see how you are likely to appear anti-semitic with that statement?

I would define anti-semitism as prejudice against Jewish people.