Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

[Archived] Pc Gone Mad!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Here

I on the other hand love spicy food and would never use the phrase Yuk! B)

Me too! but it just goes to show how mad this country is at the moment.

Can you imagine the furore if we turned round and said children who practise certain religions aren`t allowed to say yuk to bacon butties etc.

The crazy world of Gordon Brown (he should have been named Arthur!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes me laugh is these kids are three years old, 'yuk' is one of the longest words in their small vocabulary!

I can just imagine the dinner lady serving young Timmy a spicy curry who politely replies, 'Ah no thank you madame, I'm more of a lobster with a nice avacado dressing man myself thank you. Please forgive my young taste buds which haven't adjusted to some of the more international meals.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just kids, though, isn't it. They come out with all sorts of stuff. One of my granddaughters saw a black fellow across the street, ran over to him with a huge smile and said "Hello, chocolate man". The stupid man made a tremendous fuss and even telling him that is was actually a compliment as she adores her grandad Mr Roversmum who as you know is black wouldn't shut him up. One of the others used to refer to him as 'black grandad' and got into trouble at school for it! I despair, I really do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The National Children's Bureau which receives £12 million a year ........"

Good to see the government spending our taxes wisely . Urging teachers of toddlers to report on their kids to higher authorities ...........God help us all :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my granddaughters saw a black fellow across the street, ran over to him with a huge smile and said "Hello, chocolate man".

:)

Young children are wonderfully innocent aren't they.

I suppose if the PC loonies had their way, your granddaugher would be given a stern telling off, her choice of words strongly condemned, and the incident would be reported to the local council and to the police. The little girl's parents would be threatened with a fine and sent on a 'diversity training course' to teach them never to let their children say such wicked things like "chocolate man" again.

it just goes to show how mad this country is at the moment.

Absolutely - and dare I say that if this thread is locked due to being "offensive" then it would sadly demonstrate that the PC virus has infected this messageboard.

Another recent example of PC madness was a case of a grandmother in Kent who was woken up for the third time in one night by a group of noisy drunken students. She went outside and said to them: "Why can't you go back to where you come from and make some noise there? I bet your families and neighbours wouldn't put up with it. What gives you the right to frighten my elderly neighbours, cause damage and keep us awake at night?"

The grandmother was later arrested by police and accused of being a racist after two Asians in the group of drunken louts complained to police about the phrase: "Why can't you go back to where you come from and make some noise there?"

The woman was charged with using racially aggravated threatening words or behaviour under section 5 of the Public Order Act.

Our once fine country really has gone PC Mad. The liberal fascists - as Blue Phil calls them - have sadly taken control.

I despair, I really do.

You're not the only one Mum....

Link to the story of the "racist grandmother" here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Type

"Toddlers who dislike spicy food" into www.google.co.uk

The first hit is The Daily Telegraph.

The second is the BNP.

No need to go much further with this one is there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Type

"Toddlers who dislike spicy food" into www.google.co.uk

The first hit is The Daily Telegraph.

The second is the BNP.

No need to go much further with this one is there?

There's some dodgy heavily agenda'd sites there all right.

3rd one down called 'jihadwatch' http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/021673.php

wont even open with internet explorer why is that? And how do they do it? And who decides who can read what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Type

"Toddlers who dislike spicy food" into www.google.co.uk

The first hit is The Daily Telegraph.

The second is the BNP.

No need to go much further with this one is there?

OK Colin - I tried that . The BNP weren't even on then first page (I didn't go further ) .

The third hit was Jihad Watch - which Internet Explorer refused access to (so much for the "free" web...)

The fourth hit was from some feminist site ......

You were right about the Telegraph , though . Well done .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I love is that if you ever want to discuss an issue such as this, the Daily Mail and/or Telegraph will be brought into it. For God sake the Mail is not the mouthpiece of Combat 18.

Blaming right wing newspapers for such stories is a cop out. Britain is one of the most tolerant countires in the world and the obsession of the liberal ruling class with 'tolerance' 'diversity' 'inclusion' etc is causing much more harm than good.

Newsflash- not every part of British society is institutionally racist, a child saying 'choclate face' does not mean they are on the slippery slope to becoming the next Oswald Mosley.

Issues that should have been faced in this country a generation ago, eg the damage a lack of black father figures has caused to Black communities were ignored as it would be 'racist' to intervene.

I think the vast majority of UK citizens no longer take seriously the bleatings of those that will try and paint 'spicy food' type stories as propaganda for racist reactionaries, the liberals have lost the argument with the general public and have become a parody of themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The National Children's Bureau which receives £12 million a year ........"

Good to see the government spending our taxes wisely . Urging teachers of toddlers to report on their kids to higher authorities ...........God help us all :rolleyes:

What else do they do that makes you so sure £12m is wasted?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Type

"Toddlers who dislike spicy food" into www.google.co.uk

The first hit is The Daily Telegraph.

The second is the BNP.

No need to go much further with this one is there?

No it dosen't.

Colin why try to defend the indefensible? its both predictable & basically plays up to a caricature of the neo left-liberal agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colin why try to defend the indefensible?

Like misquoting the introductory line to a report and basing an attempt at inducing hysteria on it?

"This guidance aims to steer young children away from the development of racist ideas, by encouraging adults to look for such signs as racial slurs, ...."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it dosen't.

Colin why try to defend the indefensible? its both predictable & basically plays up to a caricature of the neo left-liberal agenda.

It did when I did the search. Other web sites have now picked up this non-story and google has dropped the BNP site to No 9.

Internet search engine science (of which I know nothing) rather than me trying to "defend the indefensible."

Is that OK for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK Colin - I tried that . The BNP weren't even on then first page (I didn't go further ) .

The third hit was Jihad Watch - which Internet Explorer refused access to (so much for the "free" web...)

The fourth hit was from some feminist site ......

You were right about the Telegraph , though . Well done .

No it dosen't.

Colin why try to defend the indefensible? its both predictable & basically plays up to a caricature of the neo left-liberal agenda.

It did when I did the search. Other web sites have now picked up this non-story and google has dropped the BNP site to No 9.

Internet search engine science (of which I know nothing) rather than me trying to "defend the indefensible."

Is that OK for you?

You're quite right Colin. Phil and Bazza neglected to select the "Pages From the UK" option.

If you do so, BNP is still the second return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're quite right Colin. Phil and Bazza neglected to select the "Pages From the UK" option.

If you do so, BNP is still the second return.

Ok, what does that prove exactly? That a far right political party would object to such a story? Well full marks on opening our eyes to that.

So of course the liberal left will shout 'sensationalist reporting like this plays in to the hands of the far right' WRONG, treating the British populace as potential bigots will do that job for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So of course the liberal left will shout 'sensationalist reporting like this plays in to the hands of the far right' WRONG, treating the British populace as potential bigots will do that job for them.

You will find that most of the left dont do that. Sadly those that attempt to get 99% of the publicity, and even then its usually misquoted old cobblers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, what does that prove exactly? That a far right political party would object to such a story? Well full marks on opening our eyes to that.

So of course the liberal left will shout 'sensationalist reporting like this plays in to the hands of the far right' WRONG, treating the British populace as potential bigots will do that job for them.

I couldn't give two hoots what it proves. I was merely pointing out where Colin was coming from and why Phil and Bazza couldn't find the same result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.