Another typical crime.

[Roy Twing]

Well, that wont be forthcoming. Everything I said is correct. Thats that.

And there you have it - he's been shown to be utterly wrong in everything he claimed, and still he insists he's right.
I think that may very well be close to the definition of insanity.
I was going to turn it messy in the absence of an apology, but that would serve no further purpose, - we both know who the real bigot is.

Come back when your mind is more open.

[kancutlawns]

"In his book, Backdoor to Eugenics"

Stopped reading there.

Really?
That's the best comment you can make?
My point was that very learned (and respected) people are having the thoughts and debates on the question that you believe is 'yes' (therefore racist) or 'no'.
But that is ignored by you in your bigotry.

Racial pseudoscience has been around for a long time. Particularly popular in the 1930s & seems to be making a bit of comeback.

Fact is the vast majority of people with relevant expertise don’t think black people are born more violent/criminally minded.

And still you miss the point.
As does your proven to be stupid cohort on this topic.
Point is that he gave the impression that he was almost exploding with disgust that anyone would not instantly state for an absolute fact that there is no such thing as genetic predispositions towards violence, which was all that I refused to do, but all you saw (and continue to see) is that I absolutely must therefore be claiming that all black people are born criminals.
Don't you see how ridiculous you appear?

You seem to be the one exploding with disgust and desperately trawling the Internet with obscure articles about racial genetics and links to racial crimes. Roy, just show some honesty here.

[Eaststand]

Where have I been shown to be wrong? you linked an article with a story revolving about some racist geezer who writes books about eugenics, an incredibly racist theory that began when we referred to black people as savages, and is regarded as absolute nonsense nowadays.

[Ralph]

"In his book, Backdoor to Eugenics"

Stopped reading there.

Really?
That's the best comment you can make?
My point was that very learned (and respected) people are having the thoughts and debates on the question that you believe is 'yes' (therefore racist) or 'no'.
But that is ignored by you in your bigotry.

Racial pseudoscience has been around for a long time. Particularly popular in the 1930s & seems to be making a bit of comeback.

Fact is the vast majority of people with relevant expertise don’t think black people are born more violent/criminally minded.

And still you miss the point.
As does your proven to be stupid cohort on this topic.
Point is that he gave the impression that he was almost exploding with disgust that anyone would not instantly state for an absolute fact that there is no such thing as genetic predispositions towards violence, which was all that I refused to do, but all you saw (and continue to see) is that I absolutely must therefore be claiming that all black people are born criminals.
Don't you see how ridiculous you appear?

The problem is your refusal to say you don’t think black people are born with a predisposition to commit crime/violence.

[Eaststand]

"In his book, Backdoor to Eugenics"

Stopped reading there.

Really?
That's the best comment you can make?
My point was that very learned (and respected) people are having the thoughts and debates on the question that you believe is 'yes' (therefore racist) or 'no'.
But that is ignored by you in your bigotry.

Racial pseudoscience has been around for a long time. Particularly popular in the 1930s & seems to be making a bit of comeback.

Fact is the vast majority of people with relevant expertise don’t think black people are born more violent/criminally minded.

And still you miss the point.
As does your proven to be stupid cohort on this topic.
Point is that he gave the impression that he was almost exploding with disgust that anyone would not instantly state for an absolute fact that there is no such thing as genetic predispositions towards violence, which was all that I refused to do, but all you saw (and continue to see) is that I absolutely must therefore be claiming that all black people are born criminals.
Don't you see how ridiculous you appear?

The problem is your refusal to say you don’t think black people are born with a predisposition to commit crime/violence.

Indeed.

[Ralph]

Roy, what would close this would be a straightforward yes or no.

I agree that your figures underpin the fact that black men commit more crime proportionally, and it's not just down to poverty. I don't agree that black or any other people are born violent and will automatically take to a life of crime.

Do you?

I've given my answer zambo - although I doubt it is the case, - I am not going to say a categoric 'no' - it would be like stating that there is absolutely no chance of life on other planets, or ghosts existing.

You really can’t give a categoric ‘no’ the specific question Zambo asked?

[Eaststand]

hehe.

[Roy Twing]

Where have I been shown to be wrong? you linked an article with a story revolving about some racist geezer who writes books about eugenics, an incredibly racist theory that began when we referred to black people as savages, and is regarded as absolute nonsense nowadays.

That really is your problem isn't it.
Anyone who mentions racial issues that in any way reflect negatively against any ethnic minority, - your 'shout racist' gene* kicks in.


*pun intended

[Roy Twing]

"In his book, Backdoor to Eugenics"

Stopped reading there.

Really?
That's the best comment you can make?
My point was that very learned (and respected) people are having the thoughts and debates on the question that you believe is 'yes' (therefore racist) or 'no'.
But that is ignored by you in your bigotry.

Racial pseudoscience has been around for a long time. Particularly popular in the 1930s & seems to be making a bit of comeback.

Fact is the vast majority of people with relevant expertise don’t think black people are born more violent/criminally minded.

And still you miss the point.
As does your proven to be stupid cohort on this topic.
Point is that he gave the impression that he was almost exploding with disgust that anyone would not instantly state for an absolute fact that there is no such thing as genetic predispositions towards violence, which was all that I refused to do, but all you saw (and continue to see) is that I absolutely must therefore be claiming that all black people are born criminals.
Don't you see how ridiculous you appear?

The problem is your refusal to say you don’t think black people are born with a predisposition to commit crime/violence.

??
I have said that.

[Eaststand]

Where have I been shown to be wrong? you linked an article with a story revolving about some racist geezer who writes books about eugenics, an incredibly racist theory that began when we referred to black people as savages, and is regarded as absolute nonsense nowadays.

That really is your problem isn't it.
Anyone who mentions racial issues that in any way reflect negatively against any ethnic minority, - your 'shout racist' gene* kicks in.


*pun intended

Not really. Anyone who take eugenics seriously is an idiot. It is a discredited, bigoted form of pretend science.

[LordLaret]

Meanwhile, it would seem that the Police are going to try to arrest Facebook users who openly mock them:

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/05 ... ling-them/


And for those opposed to Breitbart:

http://metro.co.uk/2018/05/11/police-th ... t-7537372/

Anyone opposed to Metro?

[Eaststand]

How can you be opposed to a comic?

[LordLaret]

How can you be opposed to a comic?

Some are opposed to Breitbart linking it to Far Right activity and so I put multiple sources now, just so that if they are opposed the BB, they can't be opposed to source on the other side of the spectrum. the point remains, you can't mock the cops these days without threat of arrests.

[Eaststand]

Breitbart is a joke though mate.

Youve never been able to mock the police either. If you start slagging them off to their face in real life they tend to give you a strict talking to or arrest you if you dont pack it in, so I dont see why this is any different.

Mocking is different to criticising.

[LordLaret]

Breitbart is a joke though mate.

Youve never been able to mock the police either. If you start slagging them off to their face in real life they tend to give you a strict talking to or arrest you if you dont pack it in, so I dont see why this is any different.

Mocking is different to criticising.

Given that logic, if people at work mock me, I have a right to have them arrested then? Following that logic, mocking / joking is now forbidden? Where do you stop? Like the shows that sometimes show cops as idiots or such, do you arrest them? And fair point, if BB isn't your thing, then that's cool.