Election Year or Fear!

[swaledale]

A hate crime is defined as “any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race; religion or perceived religion; ***ual orientation or perceived ***ual orientation; disability or perceived disability and any crime motivated by hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender.”


Seeing as gammon is neither about race or religion it hardly fits. Note I'm not denying its probably childish and could be insulting to certain parts of the population but then insults generally are.

On the other hand given Thickys propensity to repeatedly post utter bilge and often offensive, hateful and demonstrably false sentiments on here, IMO using the word gammon is a lesser offence.

[ramAnag]

Tricky, you aren't in danger of being banned but you are in danger of even those who give you the occasional benefit of the doubt thinking you are going through a bit of a crisis. Calm it down a bit eh?

I rest my case.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Even by your standards that is the most one eyed pile of bollux I’ve ever read on here.

‘Gone in less than a year’? Hmmm…we’ll see. Suspect that has about as much credence as all your other prophecies.

And you should recognize a one eyed pile of....😄😄

[Geoff Parkstone]

A hate crime is defined as “any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race; religion or perceived religion; ***ual orientation or perceived ***ual orientation; disability or perceived disability and any crime motivated by hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender.”


Seeing as gammon is neither about race or religion it hardly fits. Note I'm not denying its probably childish and could be insulting to certain parts of the population but then insults generally are.

On the other hand given Thickys propensity to repeatedly post utter bilge and often offensive, hateful and demonstrably false sentiments on here, IMO using the word gammon is a lesser offence.

I'm not planning to enter the debate of what is and isn't a hate crime but just ask, for my own clarity, why gammon doesn't constitute a "hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race" as you define it, Swale.

I've never seen the word used to describe anyone other than a white race person: the notion of a black gammon (isn't that a gambling game?) is one I've not encountered, although I have met right wing / brexiteers of all race and hue - especially South Asian - and not heard gammon used in respect of them.

Yet only white folk seem to be defined as gammon, despite the political beliefs being distributed across the racial spectrum. Maybe the ruddy complexion is not so obvious on non white faces?!

This would suggest it is a "hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race" and therefore, by the definition you cited, a hate crime?

[MadAmster]

I'm not planning to enter the debate of what is and isn't a hate crime but just ask, for my own clarity, why gammon doesn't constitute a "hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race" as you define it, Swale.

I've never seen the word used to describe anyone other than a white race person: the notion of a black gammon (isn't that a gambling game?) is one I've not encountered, although I have met right wing / brexiteers of all race and hue - especially South Asian - and not heard gammon used in respect of them.

Yet only white folk seem to be defined as gammon, despite the political beliefs being distributed across the racial spectrum. Maybe the ruddy complexion is not so obvious on non white faces?!

This would suggest it is a "hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race" and therefore, by the definition you cited, a hate crime?

This whole "being offended by next to nothing" has, IMO, got completely out of hand. I do realise that some on here are pot stirring but to consider "gammon" or "gaslighter" or referring to someone as a "Karen" as being a hate crime is incredibly absurd. Whatever happened to context? Whatever happened to freedom of speech?

I fear that we are close to the point where the name calling and the complaining about being "offended" will move on from the verbal to the physical. All driven by those who would divide and conquer. Maybe it's time to stamp, metaphorically (although some might think, literally), on Tommy Ten Names and those who fund him and those who encourage him. There's more of us than them and it's time WE took control of matters before the "wrong" revolution hits the fan and the majority end up in 15 minute cities amid a great reset.

I've long thought the 5% were ensuring they remained exactly that by having politicians in their pockets and that they organised themselves into the WEF to make sure they remain in control. I am now starting to think that day is not far away when they do own everything and, as Schwab wrote, we'll have nothing and we'll be happy.

Basically, the enemy isn't those fleeing conflict and deciding to come to the UK or elsewhere in (geographically) Europe. It's not those of a different colour or of a different religion. It's the 5%. The elite. The rich. Call them what you will. They saw population in Europe falling. That would affect their trade. Growth could not be sustained. That would hit the size of the dividends. No, that can't happen. The only way to keep growth going is to increase population and population growth. Hence the great need for immigration. The richest of them fund wars that ups the number of refugees and asylum seekers. The 5% are the ONE group that benefits from mass immigration. They also control politicians and through that they control the police and armed forces.

Is the above a mere conspiracy theory I've concocted or something that has been creeping along for ages and is now close to reaching the point of no return?

[Trickytreesreds]

Tricky, you aren't in danger of being banned but you are in danger of even those who give you the occasional benefit of the doubt thinking you are going through a bit of a crisis. Calm it down a bit eh? We know its tough being a Forest fan but it can't be THIS tough

Being a Forest fan is far from tough at the moment AF. Who'd have thought 3 years ago, we'd be buying international players of £30 M + and have players being valued at £60M+ ? Brazillians/Argies/ Swedes/Portugese etc Thanks for your concern though mucker

[ramAnag]

I'm not planning to enter the debate of what is and isn't a hate crime but just ask, for my own clarity, why gammon doesn't constitute a "hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race" as you define it, Swale.

I've never seen the word used to describe anyone other than a white race person: the notion of a black gammon (isn't that a gambling game?) is one I've not encountered, although I have met right wing / brexiteers of all race and hue - especially South Asian - and not heard gammon used in respect of them.

Yet only white folk seem to be defined as gammon, despite the political beliefs being distributed across the racial spectrum. Maybe the ruddy complexion is not so obvious on non white faces?!

This would suggest it is a "hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race" and therefore, by the definition you cited, a hate crime?

Lol…considering you’re ‘not planning to enter the debate on what is and isn’t a hate crime’ that’s a far from succinct post on…why it’s a hate crime.

[ramAnag]

And you should recognize a one eyed pile of....😄😄

Ah…the rear gunner reappears.

[Andy_Faber]

A hate crime is defined as “any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s…disability or perceived disability…

gammon is neither about race or religion

So, guilty as charged, your obsession with anti -white sentiment as pointed out by GP moves you to ignore, or even be unaware of, your own assertion from an earlier post that such folk are probably so identified due to suffering from hypertension (I think your jibe just called it high blood pressure) which is recognised as a disability.

So you define the offence then decide some of it doesn’t count as it doesn’t fit your narrative? Try harder…

[Geoff Parkstone]

Lol…considering you’re ‘not planning to enter the debate on what is and isn’t a hate crime’ that’s a far from succinct post on…why it’s a hate crime.

I honestly don't care what it's called, they are just words at the end of the day. I'm simply struggling to understand the denial of the obvious, but that's up to the denier.

I also rather liked the idea of blackgammon in truth! Also when growing up we had saddleback pigs (black and white for the uninitiated) which made lovely mixedracegammon.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Ah…the rear gunner reappears.

You might at least try to figure out an original slight!! Perhaps Heckschwein?

[ramAnag]

You might at least try to figure out an original slight!! Perhaps Heckschwein?

Figure it out? I know you’re often randomly obscure but it really didn’t take much. One rule for one…perhaps.

[ramAnag]

This whole "being offended by next to nothing" has, IMO, got completely out of hand. I do realise that some on here are pot stirring but to consider "gammon" or "gaslighter" or referring to someone as a "Karen" as being a hate crime is incredibly absurd. Whatever happened to context? Whatever happened to freedom of speech?

I fear that we are close to the point where the name calling and the complaining about being "offended" will move on from the verbal to the physical. All driven by those who would divide and conquer. Maybe it's time to stamp, metaphorically (although some might think, literally), on Tommy Ten Names and those who fund him and those who encourage him. There's more of us than them and it's time WE took control of matters before the "wrong" revolution hits the fan and the majority end up in 15 minute cities amid a great reset.

I've long thought the 5% were ensuring they remained exactly that by having politicians in their pockets and that they organised themselves into the WEF to make sure they remain in control. I am now starting to think that day is not far away when they do own everything and, as Schwab wrote, we'll have nothing and we'll be happy.

Basically, the enemy isn't those fleeing conflict and deciding to come to the UK or elsewhere in (geographically) Europe. It's not those of a different colour or of a different religion. It's the 5%. The elite. The rich. Call them what you will. They saw population in Europe falling. That would affect their trade. Growth could not be sustained. That would hit the size of the dividends. No, that can't happen. The only way to keep growth going is to increase population and population growth. Hence the great need for immigration. The richest of them fund wars that ups the number of refugees and asylum seekers. The 5% are the ONE group that benefits from mass immigration. They also control politicians and through that they control the police and armed forces.

Is the above a mere conspiracy theory I've concocted or something that has been creeping along for ages and is now close to reaching the point of no return?

Talking about the ‘wrong revolution hitting the fan’…I see the fox hunting fraternity are attempting to have themselves categorised as a protected ethnic minority. Seriously…for fox sake!

P.S. Their leader is a guy called Swales, but I very much doubt it’s ‘ours’!

[Geoff Parkstone]

I have no idea what you mean. I was suggesting you use an original nickname, rather than using your own. That nickname must remain uniquely yours, you've earned it.

Hence my suggested alternative of Heckschwein which essentially means the same.

[ramAnag]

I have no idea what you mean. I was suggesting you use an original nickname, rather than using your own. That nickname must remain uniquely yours, you've earned it.

Hence my suggested alternative of Heckschwein which essentially means the same.

Would have thought my nickname’, as you put it, is rA…which could stand for the Egyptian God of the Sun or - rather less flatteringly - rheumatoid arthritis. Take your pick.
‘Rear Gunner’ isn’t a ‘nickname’ it’s a term which just you, TTR and, more occasionally, AF turn to when my agreement with or defence of Swale irritates you.
I make no claim to its exclusivity so when you, rather more alarmingly, are found agreeing with or defending TTR it seems only fair to make the same claim but if you prefer ‘tail-end pig’ that’s up to you.