Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
I can't stand Jewish people
15 views
Skip to first unread message
The Todal
May 9, 2013, 4:26:50 AM5/9/13
to
A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
disciplinary action and a fine.
I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2321362/I-stand-Jewish-people-Lawyer-loses-career-office-rant-queue-jumping-man-medical-centre.html
A female lawyer who blurted out: 'I cannot stand Jewish people' during
an office rant has been left with a huge legal bill after a
discrimination case was brought against her by a former colleague.
The mother-of-two complained a Jewish man had jumped the queue at a
medical centre while she was waiting to take one of her children to see
a doctor.
Later she relayed the incident in the presence of a Jewish cashier at
her law practice in Rossendale, Lancashire.
After making her comment, the unnamed cashier said: 'Please do not say
that' but Mrs Morris added: 'I don�t care, I cannot stand them.'
Three months after the incident in December 2009, the cashier left the
law firm - then brought a racial and religious claim against Mrs Morris
and the practice and won an undisclosed sum in damages.
Mrs Morris herself was then hauled before the Solicitor�s Regulation
Authority after a further complaint of discrimination by the cashier.
words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
disciplinary action and a fine.
I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2321362/I-stand-Jewish-people-Lawyer-loses-career-office-rant-queue-jumping-man-medical-centre.html
A female lawyer who blurted out: 'I cannot stand Jewish people' during
an office rant has been left with a huge legal bill after a
discrimination case was brought against her by a former colleague.
The mother-of-two complained a Jewish man had jumped the queue at a
medical centre while she was waiting to take one of her children to see
a doctor.
Later she relayed the incident in the presence of a Jewish cashier at
her law practice in Rossendale, Lancashire.
After making her comment, the unnamed cashier said: 'Please do not say
that' but Mrs Morris added: 'I don�t care, I cannot stand them.'
Three months after the incident in December 2009, the cashier left the
law firm - then brought a racial and religious claim against Mrs Morris
and the practice and won an undisclosed sum in damages.
Mrs Morris herself was then hauled before the Solicitor�s Regulation
Authority after a further complaint of discrimination by the cashier.
Nigel Oldfield
May 9, 2013, 4:41:17 AM5/9/13
to
On 09/05/2013 09:26, The Todal wrote:
> A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
> words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
> man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
> disciplinary action and a fine.
>
> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
""As the European Court of Human Rights has made clear, Article 10
> A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
> words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
> man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
> disciplinary action and a fine.
>
> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
protects not only speech which is well-received and popular, but also
speech which is offensive, shocking or disturbing (Sunday Times v UK
(No2) [1992] 14 EHRR 123):
�Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a
democratic society ... it is applicable not only to �information� or
�ideas� that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a
matter of indifference, but also as to those that offend, shock or
disturb ...�
32. Freedom of expression and the right to receive and impart
information are not absolute rights. They may be restricted but only
where a restriction can be shown to be both:
>Necessary and
>Proportionate.
These exceptions, however, must be narrowly interpreted and the
necessity for any restrictions convincingly established (see the
judgment of the European Court in the Sunday Times case at paragraph 50)
33. The common law takes a similar approach. In Chambers v DPP [2012]
EWHC 2157 (Admin), the Lord Chief Justice made it clear that:
�Satirical, or iconoclastic, or rude comment, the expression of
unpopular or unfashionable opinion about serious or trivial matters,
banter or humour, even if distasteful to some or painful to those
subjected to it should and no doubt will continue at their customary
level, quite undiminished by [section 127 of the Communications Act 2003].�
34. Prosecutors are reminded that what is prohibited under section 1 of
the Malicious Communications Act 1988 and section 127 of the
Communications Act 2003 is the sending of a communication that is
grossly offensive. A communication sent has to be more than simply
offensive to be contrary to the criminal law. Just because the content
expressed in the communication is in bad taste, controversial or
unpopular, and may cause offence to individuals or a specific community,
this is not in itself sufficient reason to engage the criminal law. As
Lord Bingham made clear in DPP v Collins [2006] UKHL 40:
�There can be no yardstick of gross offensiveness otherwise than by the
application of reasonably enlightened, but not perfectionist,
contemporary standards to the particular message sent in its particular
context.�
Interim guidelines on prosecuting cases involving communications sent
via social media; Issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions,
December 2012.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/consultations/social_media_consultation.pdf
*****
... and, of course, distress claimed by one person, does not mean that
distress was intended by another. As for Stalking, Harassment etc, under
..."
Broken Truths? (Part 2)
http://therealosc.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/broken-truths-part-2.html
--
WM
http://criticalestoppel.blogspot.co.uk
http://soaptoo.blogspot.co.uk
http://therealosc.blogspot.co.uk
Truth:Humanity:Justice
Bill
May 9, 2013, 4:42:02 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 09:26:50 +0100, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net>
wrote:
>A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
>words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
>man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
>disciplinary action and a fine.
>
>I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
>Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>
I thought the Mail was being remarkably neutral, for the Mail...
I also thought her defence, which was essentially "I don't know
anything about Jews and their history" was absurd.
wrote:
>A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
>words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
>man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
>disciplinary action and a fine.
>
>I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
>Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>
I also thought her defence, which was essentially "I don't know
anything about Jews and their history" was absurd.
kat
May 9, 2013, 5:18:49 AM5/9/13
to
The Todal wrote:
> A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the
> above words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about
> a rude man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected
> to disciplinary action and a fine.
>
> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that
> the Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone
> mad.
I got the impression they saw it more as a waste of money. Not the woman's,
> A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the
> above words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about
> a rude man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected
> to disciplinary action and a fine.
>
> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that
> the Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone
> mad.
but the cost of the case to the rest of us. I have to say, I wouldn't want
her as my solicitor though - to say something that stupid because of one
rude man doesn't suggest she thinks clearly.
--
kat
>^..^<
Bill
May 9, 2013, 5:31:19 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 9 May 2013 10:18:49 +0100, "kat" <little...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
To refuse to withdraw the comment initially until pressed shows a
level of arrogance and stupidity that is actually quite scary in a
solicitor.
wrote:
level of arrogance and stupidity that is actually quite scary in a
solicitor.
True Blue
May 9, 2013, 6:39:50 AM5/9/13
to
>
> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
AlanG
May 9, 2013, 6:41:58 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 10:31:19 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com>
wrote:
She was probably training to be a judge
wrote:
White Spirit
May 9, 2013, 7:02:24 AM5/9/13
to
On Thursday, 9 May 2013 10:31:19 UTC+1, Bill wrote:
> To refuse to withdraw the comment initially until pressed shows a
> level of arrogance and stupidity that is actually quite scary in a
> solicitor.
It's also quite normal for them.
> To refuse to withdraw the comment initially until pressed shows a
> level of arrogance and stupidity that is actually quite scary in a
> solicitor.
Bill
May 9, 2013, 7:20:22 AM5/9/13
to
The refusal to withdraw it was offensive.
She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
abelard
May 9, 2013, 7:23:17 AM5/9/13
to
wowee...i'd never have guessed
DVH
May 9, 2013, 7:38:04 AM5/9/13
to
On 09/05/2013 12:20, Bill wrote:
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 03:39:50 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
> <garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
>>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>>
>> Which, of course, it is.
>
> The initial remark was daft and insulting.
>
> The refusal to withdraw it was offensive.
Who was offended?
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 03:39:50 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
> <garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
>>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>>
>> Which, of course, it is.
>
> The initial remark was daft and insulting.
>
> The refusal to withdraw it was offensive.
Have they recovered?
>
> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>
However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
The Todal
May 9, 2013, 7:41:50 AM5/9/13
to
employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy" and expecting
everyone to see it as harmless banter including the black employees.
I think anyone hearing her remark would probably think it likely that
she wouldn't be sending work to Jewish barristers or expert witnesses.
GB
May 9, 2013, 8:07:41 AM5/9/13
to
On 09/05/2013 12:38, DVH wrote:
>> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>>
>
> You're offensive to me, Bill.
>
> However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
Are you in favour of work-place bullying?
>> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>>
>
> You're offensive to me, Bill.
>
> However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
DVH
May 9, 2013, 8:18:39 AM5/9/13
to
Farmer Giles
May 9, 2013, 8:48:51 AM5/9/13
to
criticize�.
Voltaire
True Blue
May 9, 2013, 9:00:55 AM5/9/13
to
On May 9, 12:41 pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
> On 9/5/13 12:38, DVH wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 09/05/2013 12:20, Bill wrote:
> >> On Thu, 9 May 2013 03:39:50 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
> >> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that
> >>>> the
> >>>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>
> >>> Which, of course, it is.
>
> >> The initial remark was daft and insulting.
>
> >> The refusal to withdraw it was offensive.
>
> > Who was offended?
>
> > Have they recovered?
>
> >> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>
> > You're offensive to me, Bill.
>
> > However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
>
> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
> On 9/5/13 12:38, DVH wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 09/05/2013 12:20, Bill wrote:
> >> On Thu, 9 May 2013 03:39:50 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
> >> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that
> >>>> the
> >>>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>
> >>> Which, of course, it is.
>
> >> The initial remark was daft and insulting.
>
> >> The refusal to withdraw it was offensive.
>
> > Who was offended?
>
> > Have they recovered?
>
> >> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>
> > You're offensive to me, Bill.
>
> > However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
>
> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
something obviously much worse, betrays how much you're in thrall to
the Victim Culture and how dishonest you're prepared to be.
True Blue
May 9, 2013, 9:02:50 AM5/9/13
to
>
> Voltaire
I'd never heard that one - thanks.
abelard
May 9, 2013, 9:03:23 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:00:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
<garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>On May 9, 12:41�pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
>> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
>> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
>> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
>> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>
>The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
>something obviously much worse,
what is 'much worse' about it?
<garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>On May 9, 12:41�pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
>> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
>> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
>> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
>> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>
>The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
>something obviously much worse,
abelard
May 9, 2013, 9:04:45 AM5/9/13
to
it's a disgrace....
Peter Müller
May 9, 2013, 9:06:13 AM5/9/13
to
Am Donnerstag, 9. Mai 2013 10:26:50 UTC+2 schrieb The Todal:
> A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
>
> words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
>
> man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
>
> disciplinary action and a fine.
>
>
>
> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
>
> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>
>
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2321362/I-stand-Jewish-people-Lawyer-loses-career-office-rant-queue-jumping-man-medical-centre.html
>
>
>
> A female lawyer who blurted out: 'I cannot stand Jewish people' during
>
> an office rant has been left with a huge legal bill after a
>
> discrimination case was brought against her by a former colleague.
>
>
>
> The mother-of-two complained a Jewish man had jumped the queue at a
>
> medical centre while she was waiting to take one of her children to see
>
> a doctor.
>
>
>
> Later she relayed the incident in the presence of a Jewish cashier at
>
> her law practice in Rossendale, Lancashire.
>
>
>
> After making her comment, the unnamed cashier said: 'Please do not say
>
> that' but Mrs Morris added: 'I don’t care, I cannot stand them.'
> A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
>
> words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
>
> man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
>
> disciplinary action and a fine.
>
>
>
> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
>
> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>
>
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2321362/I-stand-Jewish-people-Lawyer-loses-career-office-rant-queue-jumping-man-medical-centre.html
>
>
>
> A female lawyer who blurted out: 'I cannot stand Jewish people' during
>
> an office rant has been left with a huge legal bill after a
>
> discrimination case was brought against her by a former colleague.
>
>
>
> The mother-of-two complained a Jewish man had jumped the queue at a
>
> medical centre while she was waiting to take one of her children to see
>
> a doctor.
>
>
>
> Later she relayed the incident in the presence of a Jewish cashier at
>
> her law practice in Rossendale, Lancashire.
>
>
>
> After making her comment, the unnamed cashier said: 'Please do not say
>
>
>
>
> Three months after the incident in December 2009, the cashier left the
>
> law firm - then brought a racial and religious claim against Mrs Morris
>
> and the practice and won an undisclosed sum in damages.
>
>
>
> Mrs Morris herself was then hauled before the Solicitor’s Regulation
>
>
> Three months after the incident in December 2009, the cashier left the
>
> law firm - then brought a racial and religious claim against Mrs Morris
>
> and the practice and won an undisclosed sum in damages.
>
>
>
>
> Authority after a further complaint of discrimination by the cashier.
Why can't you stand Jewish people ?
> Authority after a further complaint of discrimination by the cashier.
True Blue
May 9, 2013, 9:09:26 AM5/9/13
to
On May 9, 2:03 pm, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:00:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:00:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>
> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >On May 9, 12:41 pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
> >> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
> >> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
> >> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
> >> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>
> >The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
> >something obviously much worse,
>
> what is 'much worse' about it?
Don't be silly.
> >On May 9, 12:41 pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
> >> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
> >> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
> >> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
> >> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>
> >The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
> >something obviously much worse,
>
> what is 'much worse' about it?
Major Scott
May 9, 2013, 9:13:08 AM5/9/13
to
--
"Th on my k yboard has stopp d working"
Major Scott
May 9, 2013, 9:14:13 AM5/9/13
to
--
Confucius say: "War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left."
abelard
May 9, 2013, 9:16:56 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:09:26 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
<garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>On May 9, 2:03�pm, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:00:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>>
>> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >On May 9, 12:41 pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
>> >> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
>> >> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
>> >> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
>> >> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>>
>> >The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
>> >something obviously much worse,
>>
>> what is 'much worse' about it?
>
>Don't be silly.
no...
<garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>On May 9, 2:03�pm, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:00:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>>
>> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >On May 9, 12:41 pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
>> >> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
>> >> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
>> >> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
>> >> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>>
>> >The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
>> >something obviously much worse,
>>
>> what is 'much worse' about it?
>
>Don't be silly.
now what's 'much worse' about it?
The Todal
May 9, 2013, 9:24:07 AM5/9/13
to
require our Attorney General to disclose the paperwork relating to
Prince Charles's attempts to influence government policy by demanding
changes to this or that law. At the moment the AG thinks that it should
all be kept strictly confidential otherwise the public might lose
respect for Prinny. The rest of the country is probably indifferent, but
it would be interesting to know whether ministers have ever intervened
to change a government decision or block a planning application merely
because this ageing member of the Royal Family, unelected by anyone, has
decided to make it a personal crusade.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/may/08/government-wrongly-blocked-prine-charles?INTCMP=SRCH
Bill
May 9, 2013, 9:35:55 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 12:38:04 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>On 09/05/2013 12:20, Bill wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 03:39:50 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>> <garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
>>>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>>>
>>> Which, of course, it is.
>>
>> The initial remark was daft and insulting.
>>
>> The refusal to withdraw it was offensive.
>
>Who was offended?
One of the staff in the office where she made her remarks.
>On 09/05/2013 12:20, Bill wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 03:39:50 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>> <garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
>>>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>>>
>>> Which, of course, it is.
>>
>> The initial remark was daft and insulting.
>>
>> The refusal to withdraw it was offensive.
>
>Who was offended?
>Have they recovered?
She resigned and sued for racial harassment, and won.
>> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>>
>
>You're offensive to me, Bill.
>However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
But be assured, if you did I'd certainly sack you.
Bill
May 9, 2013, 9:47:56 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:24:07 +0100, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net>
wrote:
Interesting use of the word 'ageing' here.
We're all 'ageing'.
Even you...
wrote:
We're all 'ageing'.
Even you...
Message has been deleted
The Todal
May 9, 2013, 9:56:32 AM5/9/13
to
existence, knowing that many people would prefer one of his sons to
succeed Queen Elizabether and having no particular expertise of his own
in any topic.
It must be difficult for him, having no clear role in life but having a
comfortable lifestyle at the taxpayers' expense. Maybe he could become a
philanthropist and hand out lots of money to charity or create a few new
workplaces for disabled or underprivileged people.
Bill
May 9, 2013, 9:59:03 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:56:32 +0100, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net>
>It must be difficult for him, having no clear role in life but having a
>comfortable lifestyle at the taxpayers' expense.
I understand he farms...
And pays tax on what he earns.
I'll bet he pays a sight more tax than you do.
wrote:
>On 9/5/13 14:47, Bill wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:24:07 +0100, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Meanwhile, in our courts the Guardian is trying to obtain an order to
>>> require our Attorney General to disclose the paperwork relating to
>>> Prince Charles's attempts to influence government policy by demanding
>>> changes to this or that law. At the moment the AG thinks that it should
>>> all be kept strictly confidential otherwise the public might lose
>>> respect for Prinny. The rest of the country is probably indifferent, but
>>> it would be interesting to know whether ministers have ever intervened
>>> to change a government decision or block a planning application merely
>>> because this ageing member of the Royal Family, unelected by anyone, has
>>> decided to make it a personal crusade.
>>>
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/may/08/government-wrongly-blocked-prine-charles?INTCMP=SRCH
>>
>> Interesting use of the word 'ageing' here.
>>
>> We're all 'ageing'.
>>
>> Even you...
>>
>
>In his case, ageing means that he is trying very hard to justify his
>existence, knowing that many people would prefer one of his sons to
>succeed Queen Elizabether and having no particular expertise of his own
>in any topic.
I thought he had a decent degree in History...
>On 9/5/13 14:47, Bill wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:24:07 +0100, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Meanwhile, in our courts the Guardian is trying to obtain an order to
>>> require our Attorney General to disclose the paperwork relating to
>>> Prince Charles's attempts to influence government policy by demanding
>>> changes to this or that law. At the moment the AG thinks that it should
>>> all be kept strictly confidential otherwise the public might lose
>>> respect for Prinny. The rest of the country is probably indifferent, but
>>> it would be interesting to know whether ministers have ever intervened
>>> to change a government decision or block a planning application merely
>>> because this ageing member of the Royal Family, unelected by anyone, has
>>> decided to make it a personal crusade.
>>>
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/may/08/government-wrongly-blocked-prine-charles?INTCMP=SRCH
>>
>> Interesting use of the word 'ageing' here.
>>
>> We're all 'ageing'.
>>
>> Even you...
>>
>
>In his case, ageing means that he is trying very hard to justify his
>existence, knowing that many people would prefer one of his sons to
>succeed Queen Elizabether and having no particular expertise of his own
>in any topic.
>It must be difficult for him, having no clear role in life but having a
>comfortable lifestyle at the taxpayers' expense.
And pays tax on what he earns.
I'll bet he pays a sight more tax than you do.
abelard
May 9, 2013, 10:08:12 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:59:03 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>I thought he had a decent degree in History...
2.2 general degree... anthropology, history, archaeology
entered cambridge uni on exam results which would not
get anyone else in...
until the event of degrees in knitting, history tended to
attract the least able entrants..
wrote:
>I thought he had a decent degree in History...
entered cambridge uni on exam results which would not
get anyone else in...
until the event of degrees in knitting, history tended to
attract the least able entrants..
True Blue
May 9, 2013, 10:10:55 AM5/9/13
to
On May 9, 2:16 pm, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:09:26 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:09:26 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >On May 9, 2:03 pm, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:00:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>
> >> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> >On May 9, 12:41 pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
> >> >> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
> >> >> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
> >> >> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
> >> >> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>
> >> >The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
> >> >something obviously much worse,
>
> >> what is 'much worse' about it?
>
> >Don't be silly.
>
> no...
>
> now what's 'much worse' about it?
On the one hand, this woman expressed a dislike of a certain group of
> >On May 9, 2:03 pm, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:00:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>
> >> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> >On May 9, 12:41 pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
> >> >> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
> >> >> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
> >> >> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
> >> >> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>
> >> >The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
> >> >something obviously much worse,
>
> >> what is 'much worse' about it?
>
> >Don't be silly.
>
> no...
>
> now what's 'much worse' about it?
people, the other expression used terms which denigrates a certain
group. She has merely revealed she dislikes Jews - she hasn't
denigrated them.
Of course, you knew all of this and I only reluctantly dignify your
charade so as not to appear evasive, as you so often are when pressed
on matters "Israel".
True Blue
May 9, 2013, 10:12:52 AM5/9/13
to
abelard
May 9, 2013, 10:16:11 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 9 May 2013 07:10:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
<garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>On May 9, 2:16�pm, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:09:26 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >On May 9, 2:03 pm, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:00:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>>
>> >> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On May 9, 12:41 pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
>> >> >> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
>> >> >> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
>> >> >> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
>> >> >> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>>
>> >> >The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
>> >> >something obviously much worse,
>>
>> >> what is 'much worse' about it?
>>
>> >Don't be silly.
>>
>> no...
>>
>> now what's 'much worse' about it?
>
>On the one hand, this woman expressed a dislike of a certain group of
>people, the other expression used terms which denigrates a certain
>group. She has merely revealed she dislikes Jews - she hasn't
>denigrated them.
i don't know whether that is a distinction without a difference...
<garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>On May 9, 2:16�pm, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:09:26 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >On May 9, 2:03 pm, abelard <abela...@abelard.org> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:00:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>>
>> >> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >> >On May 9, 12:41 pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
>> >> >> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
>> >> >> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
>> >> >> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
>> >> >> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>>
>> >> >The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
>> >> >something obviously much worse,
>>
>> >> what is 'much worse' about it?
>>
>> >Don't be silly.
>>
>> no...
>>
>> now what's 'much worse' about it?
>
>On the one hand, this woman expressed a dislike of a certain group of
>people, the other expression used terms which denigrates a certain
>group. She has merely revealed she dislikes Jews - she hasn't
>denigrated them.
>Of course, you knew all of this
>and I only reluctantly dignify your
>charade
> so as not to appear evasive
>, as you so often are when pressed
>on matters "Israel".
Bill
May 9, 2013, 10:17:55 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 16:08:12 +0200, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
wrote:
So he has a degree from Cambridge.
What's your Cambridge degree in?
Yak sniffing?
wrote:
What's your Cambridge degree in?
Yak sniffing?
Bill
May 9, 2013, 10:24:12 AM5/9/13
to
performance was unsatisfactory I'd arrange for some training for you,
specially designed for you to fail.
Adverse report, followed by dismissal three months later when no
improvement was seen.
The employment tribunal would be told:
"'He seemed unhappy because he could not do the task set, so we
arranged training, but he proved unable to absorb it".
The 'Human Resources' element of a modern management degree is a
pretty immoral place to learn to manage staff...
But for dumping numpties you hate it's a reasonable place to get
technique... :-)
abelard
May 9, 2013, 10:26:29 AM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 15:17:55 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com>
he has earned various high military ranks and is a field marshall
among other qualifications...
wrote:
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 16:08:12 +0200, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:59:03 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I thought he had a decent degree in History...
>>
>>
>>2.2 general degree... anthropology, history, archaeology
>>
>>entered cambridge uni on exam results which would not
>> get anyone else in...
>>
>>until the event of degrees in knitting, history tended to
>> attract the least able entrants..
>
>So he has a degree from Cambridge.
he's also been promoted to the master of the company of shiprights...
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 16:08:12 +0200, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:59:03 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I thought he had a decent degree in History...
>>
>>
>>2.2 general degree... anthropology, history, archaeology
>>
>>entered cambridge uni on exam results which would not
>> get anyone else in...
>>
>>until the event of degrees in knitting, history tended to
>> attract the least able entrants..
>
>So he has a degree from Cambridge.
he has earned various high military ranks and is a field marshall
among other qualifications...
GregPublic
May 9, 2013, 10:28:24 AM5/9/13
to
On 09/05/2013 12:41, The Todal wrote:
>
> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy" and expecting
>
> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
> everyone to see it as harmless banter including the black employees.
>
That is reading to much into it. Ethnic group cultures differ. Disliking
>
an aspect of behaviour of a culture is not the same as race hatred. I
can't stand means nothing more than I dislike.
I was out once with an Jewish Israeli friend we went to a market and he
tried some pastries after which he told the stall holder he didn't like
the pastry because he thought it had too much cinnamon. The stall holder
looked him in the eye and said you're Israeli aren't you? She had picked
up on his directness as an indicator of his culture. Now you may like or
dislike his type of behaviour but I think you should be allowed to
express an opinion. He certainly felt very frustrated by English
indirectness. I don't think we should pretend all cultures are the same
and we like them equivalently. Obviously cultural differences with
English Jews are much less but I think there probably are still some to
like or dislike.
> I think anyone hearing her remark would probably think it likely that
> she wouldn't be sending work to Jewish barristers or expert witnesses.
>
young Adonis type men (or lesbian women) but like most of us she
probably makes do with whoever is providing the best service, regardless
of such preferences. Its not like Jewish lawyers are starving due to
discrimination against them is it?
Mr Pounder
May 9, 2013, 10:37:57 AM5/9/13
to
"Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:tubno8pg99realo9p...@4ax.com...
Even so, he is still a pleb.
GB
May 9, 2013, 10:48:36 AM5/9/13
to
On 09/05/2013 13:18, DVH wrote:
Quite. I didn't think that you were. This is just a question of degree.
A senior member of staff says they don't like XXX, and you're XXX. The
senior person refuses to apologise.
> On 09/05/2013 13:07, GB wrote:
>> On 09/05/2013 12:38, DVH wrote:
>>
>> On 09/05/2013 12:38, DVH wrote:
>>
>>>> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You're offensive to me, Bill.
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> You're offensive to me, Bill.
>>>
>>> However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Are you in favour of work-place bullying?
>>
>>
>
> No.
>>
>>
>
Quite. I didn't think that you were. This is just a question of degree.
A senior member of staff says they don't like XXX, and you're XXX. The
senior person refuses to apologise.
White Spirit
May 9, 2013, 10:49:58 AM5/9/13
to
On Thursday, 9 May 2013 15:28:24 UTC+1, GregPublic wrote:
> I was out once with an Jewish Israeli friend we went to a market and he
> tried some pastries after which he told the stall holder he didn't like
> the pastry because he thought it had too much cinnamon. The stall holder
> looked him in the eye and said you're Israeli aren't you?
Perhaps he had Asperger's? I can't say that market stall holders tend to like me very much.
> I was out once with an Jewish Israeli friend we went to a market and he
> tried some pastries after which he told the stall holder he didn't like
> the pastry because he thought it had too much cinnamon. The stall holder
> looked him in the eye and said you're Israeli aren't you?
Then again, I don't tend to like them very much either. They're often vulgar and working class.
> She had picked
> up on his directness as an indicator of his culture. Now you may like or
> dislike his type of behaviour but I think you should be allowed to
> express an opinion.
> He certainly felt very frustrated by English
> indirectness.
> I don't think we should pretend all cultures are the same
> and we like them equivalently.
> > I think anyone hearing her remark would probably think it likely that
> > she wouldn't be sending work to Jewish barristers or expert witnesses.
> She may prefer to do business with non Jews or indeed with good looking
> young Adonis type men (or lesbian women) but like most of us she
> probably makes do with whoever is providing the best service, regardless
> of such preferences. Its not like Jewish lawyers are starving due to
> discrimination against them is it?
Okay, that's far-fetched. The most help I tend to give to those less fortunate than me is to maintain as wide a berth as I can possibly manage - and that doesn't mean I am providing them with sleeping quarters.
The Todal
May 9, 2013, 11:44:33 AM5/9/13
to
Solicitors Regulation Authority are particularly active in fighting
discrimination. She must have known that. Any hint that she is likely to
discriminate against particular racial or religious groups, and she was
bound to face disciplinary action.
AC
May 9, 2013, 11:46:45 AM5/9/13
to
Bill wrote:
>
> I also thought her defence, which was essentially "I don't know
> anything about Jews and their history" was absurd.
>
Unless Jews are getting special treatment in law and society, what has
Jewish history got to do with any of it?
--
AC
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 09:26:50 +0100, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net>
> wrote:
>
>> A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
>> words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
>> man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
>> disciplinary action and a fine.
>>
> wrote:
>
>> A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
>> words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
>> man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
>> disciplinary action and a fine.
>>
>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>>
> I thought the Mail was being remarkably neutral, for the Mail...
>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>>
>
> I also thought her defence, which was essentially "I don't know
> anything about Jews and their history" was absurd.
>
Unless Jews are getting special treatment in law and society, what has
Jewish history got to do with any of it?
--
AC
AC
May 9, 2013, 11:50:46 AM5/9/13
to
PC should be told to shut the fuck up and stop risking the future of our
Monarchy.
--
AC
DVH
May 9, 2013, 12:03:01 PM5/9/13
to
account firmly into fantasy.
>
> Adverse report, followed by dismissal three months later when no
> improvement was seen.
>
> The employment tribunal would be told:
>
> "'He seemed unhappy
> because he could not do the task set, so we
> arranged training, but he proved unable to absorb it".
>
> The 'Human Resources' element of a modern management degree is a
> pretty immoral place to learn to manage staff...
>
> But for dumping numpties you hate it's a reasonable place to get
> technique... :-)
>
dignity, and you don't like that.
True Blue
May 9, 2013, 12:12:54 PM5/9/13
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
You've got "dishonest" written through you like a stick of rock,
haven't you William?
GregPublic
May 9, 2013, 12:57:55 PM5/9/13
to
Solicitors Regulation Authority are particularly *keen to be seen*
fighting *some types of* discrimination. She must have known that.
In a sane world the appropriate response would be for the girl to be
given an office etiquette talking to from her manager.
DVH
May 9, 2013, 1:42:37 PM5/9/13
to
On 09/05/2013 16:44, The Todal wrote:
Why aren't you facing disciplinary action?
Mentalguy2k8
May 9, 2013, 2:09:12 PM5/9/13
to
"AC" <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote in message news:FxPit.16599$ew7....@fx16.fr7...
Cynic
May 9, 2013, 2:23:43 PM5/9/13
to
>The mother-of-two complained a Jewish man had jumped the queue at a
>medical centre while she was waiting to take one of her children to see
>a doctor.
How did she know the man was Jewish? Is she not aware that it is not
only Jews who are circumcised?
--
Cynic
>medical centre while she was waiting to take one of her children to see
>a doctor.
How did she know the man was Jewish? Is she not aware that it is not
only Jews who are circumcised?
--
Cynic
Farmer Giles
May 9, 2013, 2:33:01 PM5/9/13
to
garb gave her a bit of a clue.
Cynic
May 9, 2013, 2:39:03 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 19:33:01 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
wrote:
>> How did she know the man was Jewish? Is she not aware that it is not
>> only Jews who are circumcised?
>I don't think she got to know him that well, but his Orthodox Jewish
>garb gave her a bit of a clue.
I read that as "Orthodox Jewish grab"
I'll go get me specs.
--
Cynic
wrote:
>> How did she know the man was Jewish? Is she not aware that it is not
>> only Jews who are circumcised?
>I don't think she got to know him that well, but his Orthodox Jewish
>garb gave her a bit of a clue.
I'll go get me specs.
--
Cynic
abelard
May 9, 2013, 3:28:04 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 17:57:55 +0100, GregPublic
<Greg....@Yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>I think what you meant to say was that the Law Society and the
>Solicitors Regulation Authority are particularly *keen to be seen*
>fighting *some types of* discrimination. She must have known that.
>
>In a sane world the appropriate response would be for the girl to be
>given an office etiquette talking to from her manager.
after 10 years of a mediocre socialist lawyer in no. 10...
<Greg....@Yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>I think what you meant to say was that the Law Society and the
>Solicitors Regulation Authority are particularly *keen to be seen*
>fighting *some types of* discrimination. She must have known that.
>
>In a sane world the appropriate response would be for the girl to be
>given an office etiquette talking to from her manager.
the first 'thought' in the mind of any slob is...
is...can i get monetary advantage hereabouts?
Bill
May 9, 2013, 4:53:12 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 9 May 2013 07:49:58 -0700 (PDT), White Spirit
<wulfg...@gmail.com> wrote:
. Its not like Jewish lawyers are starving due to
>> discrimination against them is it?
>
>You should have seen them at the soup kitchen I volunteer at - all they did was complain that the food was not kosher. No wonder they were hungry.
>
>Okay, that's far-fetched.
True. The idea of you helping in a soup kitchen is rather far fetched.
<wulfg...@gmail.com> wrote:
. Its not like Jewish lawyers are starving due to
>> discrimination against them is it?
>
>You should have seen them at the soup kitchen I volunteer at - all they did was complain that the food was not kosher. No wonder they were hungry.
>
>Okay, that's far-fetched.
Bill
May 9, 2013, 4:55:35 PM5/9/13
to
Bill
May 9, 2013, 4:56:31 PM5/9/13
to
However I still prefer him to the alternative.
Bill
May 9, 2013, 4:57:38 PM5/9/13
to
She probably got bumped by a Chassid, which is different.
DVH
May 9, 2013, 5:10:14 PM5/9/13
to
Bill
May 9, 2013, 5:15:33 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:10:14 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>On 09/05/2013 21:55, Bill wrote:
>>>>>> But be assured, if you did I'd certainly sack you.
>>>>
>>>>> On what grounds?
>>>>
>>>> I'd find you a job you hated or couldn't do, then, when your
>>>> performance was unsatisfactory I'd arrange for some training for you,
>>>> specially designed for you to fail.
>>>>
>>>> Adverse report, followed by dismissal three months later when no
>>>> improvement was seen.
>>>>
>>>> The employment tribunal would be told:
>>>>
>>>> "'He seemed unhappy because he could not do the task set, so we
>>>> arranged training, but he proved unable to absorb it".
>>>>
>>>> The 'Human Resources' element of a modern management degree is a
>>>> pretty immoral place to learn to manage staff...
>>>>
>>>> But for dumping numpties you hate it's a reasonable place to get
>>>> technique... :-)- Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>
>>> You've got "dishonest" written through you like a stick of rock,
>>> haven't you William?
>>
>> It's a technique taught in British universities.
>>
>
>That's your excuse for lying?
There are no lies involved.
It would all be true.
And you'd still get the sack.
>On 09/05/2013 21:55, Bill wrote:
>>>>>> But be assured, if you did I'd certainly sack you.
>>>>
>>>>> On what grounds?
>>>>
>>>> I'd find you a job you hated or couldn't do, then, when your
>>>> performance was unsatisfactory I'd arrange for some training for you,
>>>> specially designed for you to fail.
>>>>
>>>> Adverse report, followed by dismissal three months later when no
>>>> improvement was seen.
>>>>
>>>> The employment tribunal would be told:
>>>>
>>>> "'He seemed unhappy because he could not do the task set, so we
>>>> arranged training, but he proved unable to absorb it".
>>>>
>>>> The 'Human Resources' element of a modern management degree is a
>>>> pretty immoral place to learn to manage staff...
>>>>
>>>> But for dumping numpties you hate it's a reasonable place to get
>>>> technique... :-)- Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>
>>> You've got "dishonest" written through you like a stick of rock,
>>> haven't you William?
>>
>> It's a technique taught in British universities.
>>
>
>That's your excuse for lying?
It would all be true.
And you'd still get the sack.
DVH
May 9, 2013, 5:32:38 PM5/9/13
to
Alex Heney
May 9, 2013, 5:33:59 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 9 May 2013 06:00:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
<garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>On May 9, 12:41�pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
>something obviously much worse, betrays how much you're in thrall to
>the Victim Culture and how dishonest you're prepared to be.
It is *maybe* just very slightly worse, but no way is it "much worse",
never mind "obviously" so.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Woman's mind is cleaner than man's; it changes more often
To reply by email, my address is alexDOTheneyATgmailDOTcom
<garyb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>On May 9, 12:41�pm, The Todal <deadmail...@beeb.net> wrote:
>> On 9/5/13 12:38, DVH wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 09/05/2013 12:20, Bill wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 9 May 2013 03:39:50 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>> >> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>>
>> >>> Which, of course, it is.
>>
>> >> The initial remark was daft and insulting.
>>
>> >> The refusal to withdraw it was offensive.
>>
>> > Who was offended?
>>
>> > Have they recovered?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 09/05/2013 12:20, Bill wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 9 May 2013 03:39:50 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>> >> <garybagg...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>>
>> >>> Which, of course, it is.
>>
>> >> The initial remark was daft and insulting.
>>
>> >> The refusal to withdraw it was offensive.
>>
>> > Who was offended?
>>
>>
>> >> She is a solicitor, �she should have known better.
>>
>> > You're offensive to me, Bill.
>>
>> >> She is a solicitor, �she should have known better.
>>
>> > You're offensive to me, Bill.
>>
>> > However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
>>
>>
>> I wouldn't want to be employed in an organisation where a fairly senior
>> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
>> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
>> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>
>The fact that you have had to resort to equating what she said to
>> employee (ie a solicitor, rather than a lowly messenger) can openly say
>> that she can't stand Jewish people and nobody disciplines her for it.
>> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy"
>
>something obviously much worse, betrays how much you're in thrall to
>the Victim Culture and how dishonest you're prepared to be.
It is *maybe* just very slightly worse, but no way is it "much worse",
never mind "obviously" so.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Woman's mind is cleaner than man's; it changes more often
To reply by email, my address is alexDOTheneyATgmailDOTcom
Alex Heney
May 9, 2013, 5:38:16 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:13:08 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 13:07:41 +0100, GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>> On 09/05/2013 12:38, DVH wrote:
>>
That wasn't exaggeration.
It is just possible that when she said it initially, she didn't
realise that the cashier nearby was Jewish (although that isn't much
excuse for the remark being made publicly).
But once said cashier pointed this fact out and asked for an apology,
the fact that none was forthcoming made it into bullying.
>On Thu, 09 May 2013 13:07:41 +0100, GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>> On 09/05/2013 12:38, DVH wrote:
>>
>>>> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You're offensive to me, Bill.
>>>
>>> However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> You're offensive to me, Bill.
>>>
>>> However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
>>
>>
>> Are you in favour of work-place bullying?
>
>Are you in favour of gross exaggeration?
>
That wasn't exaggeration.
It is just possible that when she said it initially, she didn't
realise that the cashier nearby was Jewish (although that isn't much
excuse for the remark being made publicly).
But once said cashier pointed this fact out and asked for an apology,
the fact that none was forthcoming made it into bullying.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
May I please be excused? My Brain is full.
Alex Heney, Global Villager
True Blue
May 9, 2013, 5:40:55 PM5/9/13
to
Sorry, you don't deserve any more cerebral response than that. You
know why.
True Blue
May 9, 2013, 5:43:02 PM5/9/13
to
Major Scott
May 9, 2013, 5:48:41 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:38:16 +0100, Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:13:08 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 13:07:41 +0100, GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/05/2013 12:38, DVH wrote:
>>>
>>>>> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're offensive to me, Bill.
>>>>
>>>> However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Are you in favour of work-place bullying?
>>
>> Are you in favour of gross exaggeration?
>
> That wasn't exaggeration.
>
> It is just possible that when she said it initially, she didn't
> realise that the cashier nearby was Jewish (although that isn't much
> excuse for the remark being made publicly).
>
> But once said cashier pointed this fact out and asked for an apology,
> the fact that none was forthcoming made it into bullying.
If I punched you in the face, I would be bullying you.
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:13:08 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 13:07:41 +0100, GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/05/2013 12:38, DVH wrote:
>>>
>>>>> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're offensive to me, Bill.
>>>>
>>>> However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Are you in favour of work-place bullying?
>>
>> Are you in favour of gross exaggeration?
>
> That wasn't exaggeration.
>
> It is just possible that when she said it initially, she didn't
> realise that the cashier nearby was Jewish (although that isn't much
> excuse for the remark being made publicly).
>
> But once said cashier pointed this fact out and asked for an apology,
> the fact that none was forthcoming made it into bullying.
If I threatened to kill your brother if you didn't do as I told you, I would be bullying you.
If I stole your lunch money, I would be bullying you.
If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
--
Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and newsgroups are nothing like Shakespeare
Szymon von Ulezalka
May 9, 2013, 6:14:38 PM5/9/13
to
> It's not really different from saying "Niggers are lazy" and expecting
> everyone to see it as harmless banter including the black employees.
it's quite different thing:
> everyone to see it as harmless banter including the black employees.
the first one ("I don't like Jews") describes her internal state (i.e.
sympathy- or in this case lack of it), although it feels pretty real
for the subject (i.e. the solicitor) it's a thing that cannot be
described as something real, really existing.
claims "niggers are lazy" can be validated by other parties, i.e. one
can proof that person wrong (or provide proofs to support it)- by
tests, which should be able to be reproduced etc.
these are two different things.
> I think anyone hearing her remark would probably think it likely that
> she wouldn't be sending work to Jewish barristers or expert witnesses.
work.
simon
Bill
May 9, 2013, 6:19:51 PM5/9/13
to
And with you two it obviously wouldn't be difficult to find a task
that was both beyond you and appeared to be within the ability of any
normal person.
True Blue
May 9, 2013, 7:07:47 PM5/9/13
to
On May 9, 10:48 pm, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:38:16 +0100, Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:13:08 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:38:16 +0100, Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:13:08 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 13:07:41 +0100, GB <NOTsome...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On 09/05/2013 12:38, DVH wrote:
>
> >>>>> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>
> >>>> You're offensive to me, Bill.
>
> >>>> However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
>
> >>> Are you in favour of work-place bullying?
>
> >> Are you in favour of gross exaggeration?
>
> > That wasn't exaggeration.
>
> > It is just possible that when she said it initially, she didn't
> > realise that the cashier nearby was Jewish (although that isn't much
> > excuse for the remark being made publicly).
>
> > But once said cashier pointed this fact out and asked for an apology,
> > the fact that none was forthcoming made it into bullying.
>
> If I punched you in the face, I would be bullying you.
> If I threatened to kill your brother if you didn't do as I told you, I would be bullying you.
> If I stole your lunch money, I would be bullying you.
>
> If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
In Alex's world? Of course!
>
> >>> On 09/05/2013 12:38, DVH wrote:
>
> >>>>> She is a solicitor, she should have known better.
>
> >>>> You're offensive to me, Bill.
>
> >>>> However, a large sum of money would cure my feelings. Please see to it.
>
> >>> Are you in favour of work-place bullying?
>
> >> Are you in favour of gross exaggeration?
>
> > That wasn't exaggeration.
>
> > It is just possible that when she said it initially, she didn't
> > realise that the cashier nearby was Jewish (although that isn't much
> > excuse for the remark being made publicly).
>
> > But once said cashier pointed this fact out and asked for an apology,
> > the fact that none was forthcoming made it into bullying.
>
> If I punched you in the face, I would be bullying you.
> If I threatened to kill your brother if you didn't do as I told you, I would be bullying you.
> If I stole your lunch money, I would be bullying you.
>
> If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
abelard
May 9, 2013, 7:16:26 PM5/9/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:48:41 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
i wouldn't want you in any position of power where you
>If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
had the opportunity to act on your hatred...
in fact, if you are inclined to hatreds, i'd wonder about your sanity
F Murtz
May 10, 2013, 12:26:34 AM5/10/13
to
The Todal wrote:
> A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
> words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
> man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
> disciplinary action and a fine.
>
> A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
> words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
> man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
> disciplinary action and a fine.
>
> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2321362/I-stand-Jewish-people-Lawyer-loses-career-office-rant-queue-jumping-man-medical-centre.html
> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>
>
>
> A female lawyer who blurted out: 'I cannot stand Jewish people' during
> an office rant has been left with a huge legal bill after a
> discrimination case was brought against her by a former colleague.
>
> The mother-of-two complained a Jewish man had jumped the queue at a
> medical centre while she was waiting to take one of her children to see
> a doctor.
>
> Later she relayed the incident in the presence of a Jewish cashier at
> The mother-of-two complained a Jewish man had jumped the queue at a
> medical centre while she was waiting to take one of her children to see
> a doctor.
>
> her law practice in Rossendale, Lancashire.
>
> After making her comment, the unnamed cashier said: 'Please do not say
> that' but Mrs Morris added: 'I don�t care, I cannot stand them.'
>
> Three months after the incident in December 2009, the cashier left the
> law firm - then brought a racial and religious claim against Mrs Morris
> and the practice and won an undisclosed sum in damages.
>
> Mrs Morris herself was then hauled before the Solicitor�s Regulation
> Authority after a further complaint of discrimination by the cashier.
>
Why are you not allowed to dislike anything and say so.
Put another way,you are probably allowed to dislike what you want so why
should it be illegal to say so?
DVH
May 10, 2013, 1:48:01 AM5/10/13
to
people is that when they tell me about it, it's boring.
Hate away, but don't tell me about an inner state that's so
fundamentally uninteresting.
Don't give me an elaborate account of your hatred of a musical genre,
like heavy metal or jazz. Or a type of food. All you're doing is telling
me about an inability to control your emotions and attention. If you
think I should be interested, then you've misunderstood me and how to
interact with the world in general.
Don't start sentences with "Don't you hate it when people...", because
no I don't. I find it boring and fix my attention elsewhere, which is
what you should do too.
The other word you shouldn't use in my presence is "weird", unless
you're quoting romantic poetry.
geopelia
May 10, 2013, 2:46:14 AM5/10/13
to
"AC" <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote in message news:qBPit.16600$ew7....@fx16.fr7...
> The Todal wrote:
>> On 9/5/13 14:02, True Blue wrote:
>>> On May 9, 1:48 pm, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>> On 09/05/2013 11:39, True Blue wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression
>>>>>> that the
>>>>>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression
>>>>>> that the
>>>>>> Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>>>>
>>>>> Which, of course, it is.
>>>>
>>>> 'To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed
>>>>
>>>> to
>>>> criticize .
>>>>
>>>> Voltaire
>>>
>>> I'd never heard that one - thanks.
>>>
>>
>> Meanwhile, in our courts the Guardian is trying to obtain an order to
>> require our Attorney General to disclose the paperwork relating to
>> Prince Charles's attempts to influence government policy by demanding
>> changes to this or that law. At the moment the AG thinks that it should
>> all be kept strictly confidential otherwise the public might lose
>> respect for Prinny. The rest of the country is probably indifferent, but
>> it would be interesting to know whether ministers have ever intervened
>> to change a government decision or block a planning application merely
>> because this ageing member of the Royal Family, unelected by anyone, has
>> decided to make it a personal crusade.
>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/may/08/government-wrongly-blocked-prine-charles?INTCMP=SRCH
>>
>
> Even as a royalist, I find PC's interventions in this way disgraceful. PC
> should be told to shut the fuck up and stop risking the future of our
> Monarchy.
>
Some people say that the British Royal Family descends from King David.
That would make them Jewish, also related to Jesus.
Be that as it may, it's an interesting idea!
Cassandra
May 10, 2013, 2:58:12 AM5/10/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 09:26:50 +0100, The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net>
wrote:
>A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
>words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
>man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
>disciplinary action and a fine.
>
>A mildly interesting story in the Mail today. A solicitor used the above
>words in the presence of her colleagues when complaining about a rude
>man who barged ahead of her in a queue, and was then subjected to
>disciplinary action and a fine.
>
>I have no sympathy for the silly woman but I get the impression that the
>Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>
>Mail sees the disciplinary action as political correctness gone mad.
>
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2321362/I-stand-Jewish-people-Lawyer-loses-career-office-rant-queue-jumping-man-medical-centre.html
>
>A female lawyer who blurted out: 'I cannot stand Jewish people' during
>an office rant has been left with a huge legal bill after a
>discrimination case was brought against her by a former colleague.
>
>The mother-of-two complained a Jewish man had jumped the queue at a
>medical centre while she was waiting to take one of her children to see
>a doctor.
>
>Later she relayed the incident in the presence of a Jewish cashier at
>her law practice in Rossendale, Lancashire.
>
>After making her comment, the unnamed cashier said: 'Please do not say
>that' but Mrs Morris added: 'I don�t care, I cannot stand them.'
>
>A female lawyer who blurted out: 'I cannot stand Jewish people' during
>an office rant has been left with a huge legal bill after a
>discrimination case was brought against her by a former colleague.
>
>The mother-of-two complained a Jewish man had jumped the queue at a
>medical centre while she was waiting to take one of her children to see
>a doctor.
>
>Later she relayed the incident in the presence of a Jewish cashier at
>her law practice in Rossendale, Lancashire.
>
>After making her comment, the unnamed cashier said: 'Please do not say
>
>Three months after the incident in December 2009, the cashier left the
>law firm - then brought a racial and religious claim against Mrs Morris
>and the practice and won an undisclosed sum in damages.
>
>Mrs Morris herself was then hauled before the Solicitor�s Regulation
>Three months after the incident in December 2009, the cashier left the
>law firm - then brought a racial and religious claim against Mrs Morris
>and the practice and won an undisclosed sum in damages.
>
>Authority after a further complaint of discrimination by the cashier.
>
I must be terrible to be so offended you wait three months until it is
>
safe to demand free money from your former employer.
DVH
May 10, 2013, 3:11:31 AM5/10/13
to
Nobody sane would give you the responsibiity of making such decisions.
Joe
May 10, 2013, 3:49:23 AM5/10/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:48:01 +0100
DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
> On 10/05/2013 00:16, abelard wrote:
> > On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:48:41 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >> If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It
> >> does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they
> >> wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
> >
> > i wouldn't want you in any position of power where you
> > had the opportunity to act on your hatred...
> > in fact, if you are inclined to hatreds, i'd wonder about your
> > sanity
> >
>
> The only problem I have with people hating Welsh people and Jewish
> people is that when they tell me about it, it's boring.
>
> Hate away, but don't tell me about an inner state that's so
> fundamentally uninteresting.
>
> Don't give me an elaborate account of your hatred of a musical genre,
> like heavy metal or jazz. Or a type of food. All you're doing is
> telling me about an inability to control your emotions and attention.
> If you think I should be interested, then you've misunderstood me and
> how to interact with the world in general.
>
'What do you despise? By this are you truly known'.
DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
> On 10/05/2013 00:16, abelard wrote:
> > On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:48:41 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >> If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It
> >> does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they
> >> wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
> >
> > i wouldn't want you in any position of power where you
> > had the opportunity to act on your hatred...
> > in fact, if you are inclined to hatreds, i'd wonder about your
> > sanity
> >
>
> The only problem I have with people hating Welsh people and Jewish
> people is that when they tell me about it, it's boring.
>
> Hate away, but don't tell me about an inner state that's so
> fundamentally uninteresting.
>
> Don't give me an elaborate account of your hatred of a musical genre,
> like heavy metal or jazz. Or a type of food. All you're doing is
> telling me about an inability to control your emotions and attention.
> If you think I should be interested, then you've misunderstood me and
> how to interact with the world in general.
>
--
Joe
DVH
May 10, 2013, 4:42:24 AM5/10/13
to
I don't really know what 'despise' means.
If 'despise' means the same as 'be distressed by' then it's easier.
I see things that fruitlessly try to contradict the cosmos, but which
always turn out to be false. They distress me.
"For nature is true and not a lie" - Carlyle.
"reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot
be fooled" - Feynman.
White Spirit
May 10, 2013, 4:45:53 AM5/10/13
to
On Friday, 10 May 2013 08:11:31 UTC+1, DVH wrote:
> Don't let your fantasies run away with you, Bill.
> Nobody sane would give you the responsibiity of making such decisions.
Maybe he could run the soup kitchen I volunteer at?
> Don't let your fantasies run away with you, Bill.
> Nobody sane would give you the responsibiity of making such decisions.
Bill
May 10, 2013, 6:09:20 AM5/10/13
to
It was always possible to make improvements in performance, but in
your case I think I could make an exception.
True Blue
May 10, 2013, 6:10:08 AM5/10/13
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
He'd positively shine in the public sector.
> - Show quoted text -
abelard
May 10, 2013, 6:54:45 AM5/10/13
to
geopelia
May 10, 2013, 9:21:35 AM5/10/13
to
"abelard" <abel...@abelard.org> wrote in message
news:eo1no8t47858485a7...@4ax.com...
>
>
> wowee...i'd never have guessed
I think they call themselves British Israel or something.
geopelia
May 10, 2013, 9:33:18 AM5/10/13
to
"Cassandra" <cassandr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:518c99ef...@news.virginmedia.com...
seemed to worry who was what, and we all got on very well.
I doubt if anyone would have worried if we had said anything rude to each
other in public, either.
In those days, Israel didn't exist as a state, and Hitler was just coming to
power.
All this PC stuff can sometimes be ridiculous.
Cynic
May 10, 2013, 10:41:58 AM5/10/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:58:12 GMT, cassandr...@hotmail.com
(Cassandra) wrote:
>I must be terrible to be so offended you wait three months until it is
>safe to demand free money from your former employer.
Did she wait 3 months before making any complaint, or were those 3
(Cassandra) wrote:
>I must be terrible to be so offended you wait three months until it is
>safe to demand free money from your former employer.
months the time it took to get anything done about it?
--
Cynic
The Todal
May 10, 2013, 10:54:44 AM5/10/13
to
presented her claim. On that basis I think it would be fair to describe
such a claim as part of the worst excesses of the compensation culture.
But I don't think the Mail has given the full picture. The jewish
cashier made her complaint to the senior partner on the same day, and
was understandably annoyed when the response was that Mrs Morris had
denied making the remark. And the claim was fought in the Employment
Tribunal and the cashier won, and the law firm lost.
However I think the SRA acted reasonably, given the policies that they
are obliged to implement.
Here's the judgment, which is quite thought-provoking...
http://www.solicitorstribunal.org.uk/Content/documents/11084.2012.Morris.pdf
GB
May 10, 2013, 11:29:16 AM5/10/13
to
On 10/05/2013 15:54, The Todal wrote:
> On 10/5/13 15:41, Cynic wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:58:12 GMT, cassandr...@hotmail.com
>> (Cassandra) wrote:
>>
>>> I must be terrible to be so offended you wait three months until it is
>>> safe to demand free money from your former employer.
>>
>> Did she wait 3 months before making any complaint, or were those 3
>> months the time it took to get anything done about it?
>>
>
> According to the Mail piece, the cashier left 3 months later and then
> presented her claim. On that basis I think it would be fair to describe
> such a claim as part of the worst excesses of the compensation culture.
> But I don't think the Mail has given the full picture. The jewish
> cashier made her complaint to the senior partner on the same day, and
> was understandably annoyed when the response was that Mrs Morris had
> denied making the remark.
If Mrs Morris had admitted it, the senior partner could have dealt with
> On 10/5/13 15:41, Cynic wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:58:12 GMT, cassandr...@hotmail.com
>> (Cassandra) wrote:
>>
>>> I must be terrible to be so offended you wait three months until it is
>>> safe to demand free money from your former employer.
>>
>> Did she wait 3 months before making any complaint, or were those 3
>> months the time it took to get anything done about it?
>>
>
> According to the Mail piece, the cashier left 3 months later and then
> presented her claim. On that basis I think it would be fair to describe
> such a claim as part of the worst excesses of the compensation culture.
> But I don't think the Mail has given the full picture. The jewish
> cashier made her complaint to the senior partner on the same day, and
> was understandably annoyed when the response was that Mrs Morris had
> denied making the remark.
it right then, and I think it is unlikely that it would have got this
far. As it was, I imagined that the cashier felt the senior partner was
a bit too ready to accept Mrs Morris' word over hers. I'm not surprised
that she was spitting mad.
"On her next working day, Tuesday 8 December 2009, Mrs S left a letter
of complaint for the Firm�s senior partner Mr M together with a
statement about the incident. Mr M commenced an investigation into
the complaint. On 14 December 2009 Mr M wrote to Mrs S to tell her the
outcome of the investigation. He concluded that the Respondent had
denied making the comments attributable to her and that although there
had been some discussion about Jewish people, Mr M could not be sure
that the conversation had strayed into discriminatory terms. Mr M
offered an apology if the conversation was capable of either being
misconstrued or causing offence and he passed on an apology from the
Respondent if she had unwittingly offended Mrs S."
Mr Pounder
May 10, 2013, 12:48:12 PM5/10/13
to
"Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2b3oo8ld3kc4jenas...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 15:37:57 +0100, "Mr Pounder"
> <MrPo...@RationalThought.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Bill" <black...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:tubno8pg99realo9p...@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 16:08:12 +0200, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 09 May 2013 14:59:03 +0100, Bill <black...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I thought he had a decent degree in History...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>2.2 general degree... anthropology, history, archaeology
>>>>
>>>>entered cambridge uni on exam results which would not
>>>> get anyone else in...
>>>>
>>>>until the event of degrees in knitting, history tended to
>>>> attract the least able entrants..
>>>
>>> So he has a degree from Cambridge.
>>>
>>> What's your Cambridge degree in?
>>>
>>> Yak sniffing?
>>
>>
>>He got a one to one education.
>>Even so, he is still a pleb.
>
> I rather think the point is that he most certainly isn't.
>
> However I still prefer him to the alternative.
Awwww come along Bill. Just look at the man!
>
Mr Pounder
May 10, 2013, 3:04:56 PM5/10/13
to
news:aeboo8pjl0cr89utq...@4ax.com...
Sez the nigger lover...
Alex Heney
May 10, 2013, 5:54:14 PM5/10/13
to
That doesn't mean I don't deserve one, but I wasn't expecting one from
you.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Plan to be more spontaneous.
To reply by email, my address is alexDOTheneyATgmailDOTcom
Alex Heney
May 10, 2013, 5:57:43 PM5/10/13
to
workplace of lower status or power than yourself, then you are
bullying them
And that includes cases where the offence was not initially
deliberate, but you refuse to apologise when you know it did cause
offence.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Oxymoron: Random Order.
Alex Heney, Global Villager
True Blue
May 10, 2013, 6:19:24 PM5/10/13
to
On May 10, 10:54 pm, Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 14:40:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 14:40:55 -0700 (PDT), True Blue
>
>
>
>
>
True Blue
May 10, 2013, 6:22:16 PM5/10/13
to
>
> If Mrs Morris had admitted it,
geopelia
May 10, 2013, 7:39:14 PM5/10/13
to
over sixty years ago.
That was near Aberteifi (Cardigan.)
Apart from being called a Godless Saxon, as I didn't go to Chapel or observe
the Sabbath Day, I found folks very nice.
I loved my time there, but I don't know what they made of me.
They probably get plenty of English tourists there these days.
Major Scott
May 11, 2013, 9:17:14 AM5/11/13
to
--
All that glitters has a high refractive index.
DVH
May 11, 2013, 10:13:37 AM5/11/13
to
Major Scott
May 11, 2013, 12:06:47 PM5/11/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 00:16:26 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:48:41 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>
>
>> If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
>
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:48:41 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>
>
>> If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
>
> i wouldn't want you in any position of power where you
> had the opportunity to act on your hatred...
> in fact, if you are inclined to hatreds, i'd wonder about your sanity
Then get me into trouble when and if I act, not when I call you a name ffs.
> had the opportunity to act on your hatred...
> in fact, if you are inclined to hatreds, i'd wonder about your sanity
--
At Sunday school the teacher asked little Johnny, "Do you know where little boys and girls go when they do bad things?"
"Sure," little Johnny replied. "They go out in the back of the church yard."
Major Scott
May 11, 2013, 12:07:38 PM5/11/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:48:01 +0100, DVH <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
> On 10/05/2013 00:16, abelard wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:48:41 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
>>
>> i wouldn't want you in any position of power where you
>> had the opportunity to act on your hatred...
>> in fact, if you are inclined to hatreds, i'd wonder about your sanity
>>
>
> The only problem I have with people hating Welsh people and Jewish
> people is that when they tell me about it, it's boring.
Usually all I hear are a couple of expletive adjectives before the name of the insignificant minority.
> On 10/05/2013 00:16, abelard wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:48:41 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
>>
>> i wouldn't want you in any position of power where you
>> had the opportunity to act on your hatred...
>> in fact, if you are inclined to hatreds, i'd wonder about your sanity
>>
>
> The only problem I have with people hating Welsh people and Jewish
> people is that when they tell me about it, it's boring.
--
I've got trouble with the wife again - she came into the bar
looking for me and I asked for her number.
Major Scott
May 11, 2013, 12:08:04 PM5/11/13
to
--
Seen in the back window of a car:
In case of emergency screw driver on back seat.
Major Scott
May 11, 2013, 12:08:28 PM5/11/13
to
--
Cold showers/baths/swimming:
1) Cure Hayfever. Apparently this is due to the strengthening effect on the mucous membranes.
2) Help circulation by bringing blood to capilliaries and increasing circulation through the body.
3) Improve the internal furnace, be warmer when it's cold.
4) Make losing weight easier - generating heat burns loads of calories.
5) Detoxify, by contracting muscles to eliminate toxins - skin and hair also improves.
6) Save energy.
7) Increase libido (contrary to the old wives' tale).
abelard
May 11, 2013, 12:13:32 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 17:06:47 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 00:16:26 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:48:41 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
>>
>> i wouldn't want you in any position of power where you
>> had the opportunity to act on your hatred...
>> in fact, if you are inclined to hatreds, i'd wonder about your sanity
>
>Then get me into trouble when and if I act, not when I call you a name ffs.
why on earth would anyone want to get you 'into trouble'...
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 00:16:26 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 22:48:41 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If I said I don't like the Welsh, I would not be bullying you. It does you no harm. People should be free to hate anyone they wish. If I said "I hate you", would you still call it bullying?
>>
>> i wouldn't want you in any position of power where you
>> had the opportunity to act on your hatred...
>> in fact, if you are inclined to hatreds, i'd wonder about your sanity
>
>Then get me into trouble when and if I act, not when I call you a name ffs.
sane people would be more inclined to nurture and protect you until
you were in less emotional turmoil...
DVH
May 11, 2013, 1:17:53 PM5/11/13
to
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages