A reply to:
It's lucky no one is ever likely to listen to you guys. Feeling bitter
is not a justification in itself. The root cause of the change in
England's culture is its' colonial adventures in the 18th, 19th 20th
centuries. Neither the original post nor the Indy report gives enough
information to be clear whether an injustice has taken place or not.
It seems likely that the case turned on the "I hate foreigners"
statement. No problem in saying that, but saying that at work in the
hearing of a foreign person? Sorry, your employers are bound to pack
you off to race-awareness training. In this case, the Maltese woman
complained to her employers, and HSBC didn't see any problem, so they
didn't take any action at all. Thus they got dragged into it. In 2006
Britain, we should have got past people whispering in corners about
'them dirty foreigners taking all our jobs' etc. How can a senior
member of staff show such a lack of judgement as to be so indiscreet,
and be expected to be seen as a neutral manager of junior staff?
Despite the Indy headline, it's more likely that HSBC was found guilty
of taking no action in a breach of race relation legislation (=legal
rules) rather than of supporting a Kilroy-Silk voter. Robert
Kilroy-Silk after all, is neither an offence, nor a racist.
The Indy is also mistaken in printing that 'the case is one of the
first to find that a comment not directly made to another person can
constitute racism.' Similar problems happen all the time in workplaces,
but are usually dealt with before tribunal level.
From the Indy report
'The case follows that of De Souza v Automobile Association in 1986,
which found that the expression "give the typing to the wog" was not
racial discrimination, even though it caused the victim distress,
because it was not aimed at her.'
So perhaps your right to make offensive comments at work hasn't been
In addressing the points made, I've tried to use shorter, more
Anglo-Saxon terms to satisfy Jon's problems with the longer words of
his language. Immediate recourse to ad hominem arguments (=arguing the
person because you can't argue the point) doesn't get you any further
when you foam more. The university I went to, what I might have studied
there etc are besides the point. You complain, but have not addressed
my points. Those non-sequiturs (=not connected to the preceding point):
* taking their families to what are seen as a safer place
Their choice, nothing to do with this case
* your prospects depend on you toeing the party line. Just as in the
Wild. The 'party line' has enemies on all sides, me included. FSU not
* the British citizen who has a perfect right to belong to any
political party they see fit
Purposely misleading. UKIP or whatever membership was not on trial, or
* revolution, communist takeover, blah, blah. Too mad.
To repeat, employment tribunals are not even at the level of a civil
court, let alone a criminal court, and even though their decisions are
often enforceable in law, the losers are not being found guilty of a
criminal offence, as you imply. QC notwithstanding (=whether a
QC/qualified solicitor is at the tribunal or not). The fact that they
operate under English law is normal - this is England. You yourself
point out that they have to refer to a criminal court if necessary -
they haven't the power to deal with criminal issues.
It is not becoming 'disadvantageous to have a white skin', as you put
it, it's just becoming a more equal playing field. In everyday life,
many people say what they like, but are instinctively careful about
when and where they say it. The '70s ain't coming back. Fewer white
people nowadays stand outside Brixton tube station complaining loudly
to each other about how much they hate niggers and Pakis.
I agree with some of your points (guess!). I'm interested in why you
are so angry, and what you think:
* I wonder if you also feel women are becoming too powerful?
* Could you give actual examples of English people being more likely to
be prosecuted for something for which a non-white non-English person
would not be prosecuted?
* Are you all BNP supporters?
* Chris X: Did you believe 'Bliar' was a 'war criminal' before the
truth about Iraq was generally acknowledged, or were you support the
* In what way is this decision ' completely illegal political
interference - has there been yet more legislation?
As a matter of interest, this woman's place of birth is not the issue
either. UK-born non-white people are used to being referred to as
'foreigners'. Sorry, but's too late now, England no longer belongs to
white people, it belongs to its' citizens. There may still be some room
left in Marbella if you don't like it.
Post by Sfirstname.lastname@example.org
Oh Lawd, who will save Usenet from crap and trolls?
There may be an injustice here, but no-one would know it from the
rubbish you're foaming. Please put your lead back on and go back to the
stormfront kennel. Your post is poorly argued, full of non-sequiturs,
outright lies (anybody in the world who wishes to live on our social
security?). The title of your thread is misleading. An employment
tribunal is not a court, and so no crime is implied. You evidently know
nothing about common forms of racism. It may or may not have happened
in this case, but racism in speech or act is often not face-to-face.
Sooooo... it isn't becoming
He did not say "it has become". He said "it is becoming". Are you
really so confident that he will be wrong? It is most certainly
becoming more and more disadvantageous to have a white skin, especially
the English variety in England, and a person who is white and English
is more likely to be prosecuted for something for which a non-white
non-English person would not be prosecuted.
Post by Semail@example.com
a crime to be white and English (unless
you're in the World Cup team), but maybe it should be a crime to talk
utter crap on Usenet.
You sound so mad that I was only half-inclined to post this, but I
flipped a coin...
Post by Jon°
(abridged copy below, go to above link for full version)
HSBC found guilty of racism over Kilroy-Silk backer
"A branch of one of the world's biggest banks has been found guilty of
racism after a senior member of staff told a colleague she would be voting
for Robert Kilroy-Silk at the last general election because she said he
promised to "get rid of the foreigners".
The case is one of the first to find that a comment not directly made to
another person can constitute racism.
Ms Schembri, who lives in Welwyn Garden City, north London, claimed that
Debbie Jones abused her by stating in her presence "I am against
immigration" and "I hate foreigners
This week an employment tribunal ruled the remark could be construed as
racist and ordered HSBC and the supervisor to pay compensation. The case is
one of the first to find that a comment not directly made to another person
can constitute racism."
So now if I say: I loathe Argentina' s "footballing fouls", or I don't like
"Southern Sarawakians" I can be sued.
This country is in the grip of madness. There is fascism of the left as
well as from the right. This is what we now have....Fascism of the left
that is turning our nation into a multicultural hell on Earth.
We have opened our borders to anybody in the world who wishes to live on our
social security and if we protest some lefty-liberal sitting on a tribunal
can pronounce us racist and fine us heavily (how long before they bring back
the death penalty for racism?)
Only a revolution will cleanse England now. We have gone too far down the
road of self-destruction to combat what is happening to us in any other way.
The liberal/communist/socialist's have penetrated our institutions, the law,
civil service, councils and government. These products of the sixties
universities are taking us to hell.