Discussion:
Twitter 'storm'
Add Reply
Farmer Giles
2020-07-28 06:44:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.

Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?

The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.

There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.


"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."

Voltaire (allegedly)
c***@gmail.com
2020-07-28 07:30:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
The freedom to express an opinion which can only be exercised if nobody might be offended, is no freedom at all.

As Noam Chomsky said: "if we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."
Farmer Giles
2020-07-28 07:49:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
The freedom to express an opinion which can only be exercised if nobody might be offended, is no freedom at all.
As Noam Chomsky said: "if we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."
Quite right too. Freedom of speech is not the right to express only
permitted opinions.
Keema's Nan
2020-07-28 08:47:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
The freedom to express an opinion which can only be exercised if nobody might
be offended, is no freedom at all.
As Noam Chomsky said: "if we don't believe in freedom of expression for
people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."
And of course those who feel they have been grossly insulted by anything
someone might have tweeted, couldn’t possibly ever repeat the offending
words because they are so vile.

So we could end up with people being grossly offended for reading something
as evidently truthful as Israelis are murderers and illegal land grabbers.

Telling the truth then becomes anti-semitic, and all the loonies go into self
righteous virtue signalling overdrive, ably abetted by the MSM; and
censorship is complete without laws ever having been broken.
abelard
2020-07-28 11:08:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does
your honesty does you proud
Keema's Nan
2020-07-28 12:47:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does
your honesty does you proud
I do have a twitter account which I look at once a month on average.

I find that the people who seem to populate the platform most frequently are
serious attention seekers, and people who love to know the world is taking
notice of even the most unimportant things they post.

However, it is handy to follow people such as Network Rail who post details
of train delays when they happen, which can be useful when needed.
p***@gmail.com
2020-07-28 08:54:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.

I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more lurid reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in prison and hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out. The police are involved.

I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role some Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as slave owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish history site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the trope that Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role - I hasten to repeat I don't know what he wrote.

An irony is that trade mag Variety wrongly used the photo of another artist in their article, getting itself into 'they all look the same' territory.

Patrick
Farmer Giles
2020-07-28 10:44:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more lurid reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in prison and hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out. The police are involved.
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role some Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as slave owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish history site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the trope that Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role - I hasten to repeat I don't know what he wrote.
An irony is that trade mag Variety wrongly used the photo of another artist in their article, getting itself into 'they all look the same' territory.
Patrick
Hmm, I wonder why some think that adopting fake Irish names deceives
anyone with more than half-a-brain?
abelard
2020-07-28 11:15:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why
indeed he did
Post by Farmer Giles
anyone does, but I
Post by Farmer Giles
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
a messenger eh...
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Farmer Giles
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
ie, it's probably more of swedehead's nonense
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
he got 5 minutes of fame for some daft theories...now he
has others...
typical socialist
Post by Farmer Giles
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more lurid reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in prison and hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out. The police are involved.
i expect he was oppresed as a child!
Post by Farmer Giles
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role some Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as slave owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish history site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the trope that Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role - I hasten to repeat I don't know what he wrote.
a load of crap...which was torn apart...so he turned to
being 'controverial'
Post by Farmer Giles
An irony is that trade mag Variety wrongly used the photo of another artist in their article, getting itself into 'they all look the same' territory.
durhhh
Farmer Giles
2020-07-28 11:53:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why
indeed he did
Post by Farmer Giles
anyone does, but I
Post by Farmer Giles
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
a messenger eh...
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Farmer Giles
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
ie, it's probably more of swedehead's nonense
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
he got 5 minutes of fame for some daft theories...now he
has others...
typical socialist
Post by Farmer Giles
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more lurid reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in prison and hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out. The police are involved.
i expect he was oppresed as a child!
Post by Farmer Giles
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role some Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as slave owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish history site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the trope that Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role - I hasten to repeat I don't know what he wrote.
a load of crap...which was torn apart...so he turned to
being 'controverial'
Post by Farmer Giles
An irony is that trade mag Variety wrongly used the photo of another artist in their article, getting itself into 'they all look the same' territory.
durhhh
Perhaps you should adopt a false Irish name too. Probably wouldn't be
much point, though, gibberish is still gibberish from wherever it comes.
Keema's Nan
2020-07-28 12:51:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why
indeed he did
Post by Farmer Giles
anyone does, but I
Post by Farmer Giles
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
a messenger eh...
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Farmer Giles
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
ie, it's probably more of swedehead's nonense
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
he got 5 minutes of fame for some daft theories...now he
has others...
typical socialist
Post by Farmer Giles
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more lurid
reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in prison
and hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out. The police
are involved.
i expect he was oppresed as a child!
Post by Farmer Giles
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role some
Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as slave
owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish history
site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the trope that
Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role - I hasten to
repeat I don't know what he wrote.
a load of crap...which was torn apart...so he turned to
being 'controverial'
Post by Farmer Giles
An irony is that trade mag Variety wrongly used the photo of another
artist in their article, getting itself into 'they all look the same'
territory.
durhhh
Perhaps you should adopt a false Irish name too. Probably wouldn't be
much point, though, gibberish is still gibberish from wherever it comes.
He still hasn’t explained the met police’s operation Abelard of some
years past.

I expect he briefly went by the name of Fergal O’Raffety during that phase.
abelard
2020-07-28 12:58:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 13:51:10 +0100, Keema's Nan
I expect he briefly went by the name of Fergal O’Raffety during that phase.
what a lovely name
Keema's Nan
2020-07-28 12:48:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why
indeed he did
Post by Farmer Giles
anyone does, but I
Post by Farmer Giles
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
a messenger eh...
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Farmer Giles
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
ie, it's probably more of swedehead's nonense
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
he got 5 minutes of fame for some daft theories...now he
has others...
typical socialist
Post by Farmer Giles
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more lurid
reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in prison and
hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out. The police are
involved.
i expect he was oppresed as a child!
Post by Farmer Giles
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role some
Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as slave
owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish history
site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the trope that
Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role - I hasten to
repeat I don't know what he wrote.
a load of crap...which was torn apart...so he turned to
being 'controverial'
Post by Farmer Giles
An irony is that trade mag Variety wrongly used the photo of another artist
in their article, getting itself into 'they all look the same' territory.
durhhh
Are you trying to convince us that jews have never been involved in dodgy
money making procedures?
abelard
2020-07-28 12:55:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 13:48:32 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by abelard
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why
indeed he did
Post by Farmer Giles
anyone does, but I
Post by Farmer Giles
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
a messenger eh...
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Farmer Giles
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
ie, it's probably more of swedehead's nonense
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
he got 5 minutes of fame for some daft theories...now he
has others...
typical socialist
Post by Farmer Giles
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more lurid
reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in prison and
hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out. The police are
involved.
i expect he was oppresed as a child!
Post by Farmer Giles
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role some
Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as slave
owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish history
site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the trope that
Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role - I hasten to
repeat I don't know what he wrote.
a load of crap...which was torn apart...so he turned to
being 'controverial'
Post by Farmer Giles
An irony is that trade mag Variety wrongly used the photo of another artist
in their article, getting itself into 'they all look the same' territory.
durhhh
Are you trying to convince us that jews have never been involved in dodgy
money making procedures?
i wouldn't een dare to 'convince' that you hadn't
Pancho
2020-07-28 11:19:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more lurid reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in prison and hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out. The police are involved.
As you know many posters have a problem with the term anti-semitic. The
definition has been clouded by the recent IHRC definition. A definition
which is vaguely defined and includes examples of what many people
regard as perfectly reasonable behaviour, criticism of Israel etc.

Perhaps if you could describe the problem without using that term
anti-semitism, it would help posters understand your objections. i.e.
describe the problem in terms of breaches of general standards of
behaviour or illegal actions.
Post by p***@gmail.com
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role some Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as slave owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish history site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the trope that Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role - I hasten to repeat I don't know what he wrote.
Again we have the use of a strange word, "trope". Trope doesn't imply
untrue. So using a trope don't seem to be inherently bad, per se.
Perhaps if you rephrased using more precise, objective, language people
would understand your point better.
Post by p***@gmail.com
An irony is that trade mag Variety wrongly used the photo of another artist in their article, getting itself into 'they all look the same' territory.
Interesting that what the black community perceive of as racism is
"irony". Compare and contrast irony with anti-semitism.
Col
2020-07-29 03:06:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pancho
Post by p***@gmail.com
An irony is that trade mag Variety wrongly used the photo of another
artist in their article, getting itself into 'they all look the same'
territory.
Interesting that what the black community perceive of as racism is
"irony". Compare and contrast irony with anti-semitism.
Ebony and irony....
--
Col
Peter
2020-07-29 14:48:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Col
Post by Pancho
Post by p***@gmail.com
An irony is that trade mag Variety wrongly used the photo of another
artist in their article, getting itself into 'they all look the same'
territory.
Interesting that what the black community perceive of as racism is
"irony". Compare and contrast irony with anti-semitism.
Ebony and irony....
Well done!
Pamela
2020-07-28 13:09:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from
Twitt
er.
Post by Farmer Giles
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more
lurid reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in
prison and hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out.
The police are involved.
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role
some Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as
slave owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish
history site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the
trope that Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role
- I hasten to repeat I don't know what he wrote.
It was mostly black Africans and Arabs who enslaved other blacks. Isn't
the primary role played by Jews to be slave owners along with whites?
Farmer Giles
2020-07-28 14:55:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from
Twitt
er.
Post by Farmer Giles
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more
lurid reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in
prison and hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out.
The police are involved.
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role
some Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as
slave owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish
history site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the
trope that Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role
- I hasten to repeat I don't know what he wrote.
It was mostly black Africans and Arabs who enslaved other blacks. Isn't
the primary role played by Jews to be slave owners along with whites?
https://wethoughttheywerewhite.tumblr.com/
Pamela
2020-07-28 18:34:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Pamela
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've
seen this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it
strange that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just
comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread
is buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really
stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them,
of course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims,
but instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned
from Twitt
er.
Post by Farmer Giles
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more
lurid reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in
prison and hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out.
The police are involved.
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role
some Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as
slave owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish
history site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating
the trope that Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate
role - I hasten to repeat I don't know what he wrote.
It was mostly black Africans and Arabs who enslaved other blacks.
Isn't the primary role played by Jews to be slave owners along with
whites?
https://wethoughttheywerewhite.tumblr.com/
That's new to me. He overlooks the involvement of Arabs and also of
Africans enslaving Africans.
p***@gmail.com
2020-07-29 09:32:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from
Twitt
er.
Post by Farmer Giles
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
I don't know him or his work. He has an MBE I see so arguably is not obscure.
I had to look up what he's reported to have said. Leaving aside more
lurid reports, one was the Jewish people get preferential treatment in
prison and hospital: it's plainly anti-semitic. He's been called out.
The police are involved.
I haven't seen reports on his comments on the slave trade. "The role
some Jews played in the Atlantic slave trade, both as traders and as
slave owners, has long been acknowledged by historians" as one Jewish
history site says. What would be anti-semitic would be perpetuating the
trope that Jews controlled, dominated or played a disproportionate role
- I hasten to repeat I don't know what he wrote.
It was mostly black Africans and Arabs who enslaved other blacks.
Yes. The transatlantic slave trade tapped into the Africa slave trade, mainly African, mainly black and increasingly sophisticated (the 'African agency' principle).

I don't think I'm being ahistoric by saying European involvement massively expanded the demand, and so increased the forced enslavement of Africans. Goods traded for slaves included firearms that in turn contributed to increased the scale of enslavement.
Post by Pamela
Isn't
the primary role played by Jews to be slave owners along with whites?
The European direct involvement included owners, merchants, officers and crew, increasingly complex financial and credit (banking, insurance, mortgages) and plantation owning. At a remove you get to shipbrokers, shipbuilders, goods manufacturers for trade, sugar/rum/tobacco (even lumber) traders. Those mainly white, mainly European people included people of many countries and creeds.

Patrick
Peter
2020-07-29 14:46:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade. Of course it's ok to say that
certain groups were involved but not others. Everywhere that I've seen
this reported on his views are described as a 'rant'. Isn't it strange
that when views are expressed on certain topics they're just comments or
an opinion but on taboo subjects they're always a 'rant'?
The usual subjects have come out of the woodwork on this; Alan Sugar,
David Baddiel, Gary Lineker (who clearly knows which side his bread is
buttered), the Chief Rabbi and Rachel Riley - she should really stick to
her numbers and the odd bit of dancing that she does. None of them, of
course, have called for a full investigation into Wiley's claims, but
instead have just called for him to be shut up by being banned from Twitter.
There's a pattern here, of course. Let's not debate subjects, let's not
have the facts openly investigated, let's just shoot the messenger if
the message isn't one that certain people want to have aired.
Indeed so. From time to time I point out that European slave traders
bought their slaves from African and Arabic slave traders. (Do people
think that sea captains landed at Benguela and sent their crew off in to
the jungle to grab a couple of pickaninnies, put one under each arm and
bring them back to the ship as cargo?)

I can do that because I am not a public figure. If I were, presumably I
would be called a racist for saying such negative things about Africans
and Arabs, and I would be forced out of whatever post I held.
Post by Farmer Giles
"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to
criticize."
Voltaire (allegedly)
p***@gmail.com
2020-07-29 22:13:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wednesday, 29 July 2020 15:46:47 UTC+1, Peter wrote:
If I were, presumably I
Post by Peter
would be called a racist for saying such negative things about Africans
and Arabs, and I would be forced out of whatever post I held.
You presume too much then :) It's a well travelled path, to hand is David Richardson, Suzanne Schwarz, and Anthony Tibbles, eds., Liverpool and Transatlantic Slavery (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2007) and Loveday and Schwartz, Slavery, Abolition and The Transition to Colonialism In Sierra Leone.

So, for example: "Recognizing the importance of [the black traders] William and James Cleveland to his business interests, the Liverpool merchant Robert Bostock sent his son to work with William Cleveland on the Banana Islands, off the southern portion of the peninsula. In her chapter, Denise Jones shows how Bostock's dependence on the Clevelands demonstrates the ways in which Bostock attempted to promote his interests over those of competing traders. Bostock's difficulties in redeeming debts from the Clevelands illustrates the financial insecurity of trading on this coast compared with Bonny in the Bight of Biafra, where centralized authority protected credit by enforcing payment of debts."

And lots more, really. There's a canon of academic literature emphasising the agency of African traders in the transatlantic slave trade.

What I was pointing out upthread is that the involvement of European traders hugely increased demand.

(I studied it, only as a module as an undergraduate, under Prof. Schwarz).

Patrick
Basil Jet
2020-07-29 23:50:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter
If I were, presumably I
Post by Peter
would be called a racist for saying such negative things about Africans
and Arabs, and I would be forced out of whatever post I held.
You presume too much then :) It's a well travelled path, to hand is David Richardson, Suzanne Schwarz, and Anthony Tibbles, eds., Liverpool and Transatlantic Slavery (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2007) and Loveday and Schwartz, Slavery, Abolition and The Transition to Colonialism In Sierra Leone.
So, for example: "Recognizing the importance of [the black traders] William and James Cleveland to his business interests, the Liverpool merchant Robert Bostock sent his son to work with William Cleveland on the Banana Islands, off the southern portion of the peninsula. In her chapter, Denise Jones shows how Bostock's dependence on the Clevelands demonstrates the ways in which Bostock attempted to promote his interests over those of competing traders. Bostock's difficulties in redeeming debts from the Clevelands illustrates the financial insecurity of trading on this coast compared with Bonny in the Bight of Biafra, where centralized authority protected credit by enforcing payment of debts."
And lots more, really. There's a canon of academic literature emphasising the agency of African traders in the transatlantic slave trade.
What I was pointing out upthread is that the involvement of European traders hugely increased demand.
(I studied it, only as a module as an undergraduate, under Prof. Schwarz).
You've got to call him Professor The-S-Word now.
--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Pigface Vs. DJ Linux - 2004 - Dubhead
Pancho
2020-07-30 11:38:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
You've got to call him Professor The-S-Word now.
I would guess Suzanne identifies as a woman.
Keema's Nan
2020-07-30 17:25:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.

I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
2020-07-30 17:48:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 18:25:40 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
They grossly exaggerated it if not actually fabricated it. There was
a World War going on, for fuck's sake! People do die in World Wars!
Zero sympathy here.
Post by Keema's Nan
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
That's what happens when you're thrown into a World War having
previously lived a sheltered existence in a Brum suburb. Much worse
things have happened elsewhere before and since.
Farmer Giles
2020-07-30 19:36:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.

The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Keema's Nan
2020-07-30 20:12:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you mention a
distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a denier and the
event never happened.

I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
2020-07-30 20:33:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you mention a
distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a denier and the
event never happened.
What did actually happen is quite unremarkable...certainly in
comparison to what is claimed/alleged.
Post by Keema's Nan
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
Clarify, not rewrite.
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 08:01:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you mention a
distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a denier and the
event never happened.
What did actually happen is quite unremarkable...certainly in
comparison to what is claimed/alleged.
And these two comparisons are?
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
Clarify, not rewrite.
So, if I post something - such as you were the product of a sexual union
between a golden retriever and a goat; that is clarifying history and not
re-writing it?
Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
2020-07-31 16:02:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:01:16 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you mention a
distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a denier and the
event never happened.
What did actually happen is quite unremarkable...certainly in
comparison to what is claimed/alleged.
And these two comparisons are?
It is claimed (by jews) that 6 million jews were 'holocausted'®™.
Clearly an absurdity. The real number was far smaller.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
Clarify, not rewrite.
So, if I post something - such as you were the product of a sexual union
between a golden retriever and a goat; that is clarifying history and not
re-writing it?
Neither. It is projecting your own family history onto others.
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 16:20:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:01:16 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24
hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they
had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when
creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I
have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and
the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you
mention
a
distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a denier and the
event never happened.
What did actually happen is quite unremarkable...certainly in
comparison to what is claimed/alleged.
And these two comparisons are?
It is claimed (by jews) that 6 million jews were 'holocausted'®™.
Clearly an absurdity. The real number was far smaller.
Unremarkably smaller, according to your previous post.

You seem not to have figures for your quite unremarkable death toll.
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
Clarify, not rewrite.
So, if I post something - such as you were the product of a sexual union
between a golden retriever and a goat; that is clarifying history and not
re-writing it?
Neither. It is projecting your own family history onto others.
Not mine, that was between a goat and a pig.

But as you have dodged the question and tried to be funny, I will assume that
to be an admission of a failed argument.
Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
2020-07-31 16:31:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 17:20:12 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:01:16 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24
hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they
had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when
creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I
have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and
the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you
mention
a
distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a denier and the
event never happened.
What did actually happen is quite unremarkable...certainly in
comparison to what is claimed/alleged.
And these two comparisons are?
It is claimed (by jews) that 6 million jews were 'holocausted'®™.
Clearly an absurdity. The real number was far smaller.
Unremarkably smaller, according to your previous post.
Remarkably smaller and an unremarkable event, given the total death
toll in World War II.
Post by Keema's Nan
You seem not to have figures for your quite unremarkable death toll.
Nobody knows for sure. A few hundred thousand, perhaps? Six million,
it wasn't.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
Clarify, not rewrite.
So, if I post something - such as you were the product of a sexual union
between a golden retriever and a goat; that is clarifying history and not
re-writing it?
Neither. It is projecting your own family history onto others.
Not mine, that was between a goat and a pig.
How many generations back was that?
Post by Keema's Nan
But as you have dodged the question and tried to be funny, I will assume that
to be an admission of a failed argument.
Instead, you should assume it was an appropriate reply to an abusrd
premise.
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 16:49:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 17:20:12 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:01:16 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does,
but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24
hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted
they
had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when
creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I
have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps
and
the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about
things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you
mention
a
distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a denier and
the
event never happened.
What did actually happen is quite unremarkable...certainly in
comparison to what is claimed/alleged.
And these two comparisons are?
It is claimed (by jews) that 6 million jews were 'holocausted'®™.
Clearly an absurdity. The real number was far smaller.
Unremarkably smaller, according to your previous post.
Remarkably smaller and an unremarkable event, given the total death
toll in World War II.
I see, so you are lumping genocide in with those killed while fighting, or
from bombings raids?

An interesting angle.
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
You seem not to have figures for your quite unremarkable death toll.
Nobody knows for sure. A few hundred thousand, perhaps? Six million,
it wasn't.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite
history.
Clarify, not rewrite.
So, if I post something - such as you were the product of a sexual union
between a golden retriever and a goat; that is clarifying history and not
re-writing it?
Neither. It is projecting your own family history onto others.
Not mine, that was between a goat and a pig.
How many generations back was that?
One.
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
But as you have dodged the question and tried to be funny, I will assume that
to be an admission of a failed argument.
Instead, you should assume it was an appropriate reply to an abusrd
premise.
I was just clarifying history, not re-writing it.
Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
2020-07-31 19:49:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 17:49:28 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 17:20:12 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:01:16 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100, Keema's Nan
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does,
but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24
hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted
they
had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when
creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I
have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps
and
the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about
things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you
mention
a
distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a denier and
the
event never happened.
What did actually happen is quite unremarkable...certainly in
comparison to what is claimed/alleged.
And these two comparisons are?
It is claimed (by jews) that 6 million jews were 'holocausted'®™.
Clearly an absurdity. The real number was far smaller.
Unremarkably smaller, according to your previous post.
Remarkably smaller and an unremarkable event, given the total death
toll in World War II.
I see, so you are lumping genocide in with those killed while fighting, or
from bombings raids?
There was no 'genocide'®™. Just look how many of the buggers are
running round today!
Post by Keema's Nan
An interesting angle.
Dead is dead. That's kind of what World Wars do!
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
You seem not to have figures for your quite unremarkable death toll.
Nobody knows for sure. A few hundred thousand, perhaps? Six million,
it wasn't.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite
history.
Clarify, not rewrite.
So, if I post something - such as you were the product of a sexual union
between a golden retriever and a goat; that is clarifying history and not
re-writing it?
Neither. It is projecting your own family history onto others.
Not mine, that was between a goat and a pig.
How many generations back was that?
One.
So I thought.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
Post by Keema's Nan
But as you have dodged the question and tried to be funny, I will assume that
to be an admission of a failed argument.
Instead, you should assume it was an appropriate reply to an abusrd
premise.
I was just clarifying history, not re-writing it.
Your 'clarification' consisted of an obvious absurdity.
NEMO
2020-07-31 20:41:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
It is claimed (by jews)
It is claimed (and rightly so) by EVERYBODY that you're a shiteating,
pissdrinking, donkeydicksucking, grannyfucking, jizzlicking,
motherless pile of sub-excrement nazoid PAEDO filth who takes dozens
of muzzie dicks up his arse and throat on an hourly basis.
BARRY Z. SHEIN jew paedophile of 700 Washington St B'righton Mass
2020-07-31 21:49:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 20:41:44 +0000 (UTC), NEMO aka jew paedophile
SHCUMBAG SHPAMMER Barry Z. Shein hat geshrivn:

<fluhs jew shite>

Fuck orf, jewboi!
NEMO
2020-08-01 13:44:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BARRY Z. SHEIN jew paedophile of 700 Washington St B'righton Mass
Fuck orf,
PLEASE stop using foul language in this forum, you shiteating,
pissdrinking, donkeydicksucking, grannyfucking, jizzlicking,
motherless pile of sub-excrement nazoid PAEDO filth who takes dozens
of muzzie dicks up his arse and throat on an hourly basis.

Thank you!
BARRY Z. SHEIN jew paedophile of 700 Washington St B'righton Mass
2020-08-01 16:01:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 13:44:31 +0000 (UTC), NEMO aka jew paedophile
SHCUMBAG SHPAMMER Barry Z. Shein hat geshrivn:

<fluhs jew shite>

Fuck orf, jewboi!

Don't you got any little circumcished jew shubkiddiesh to diddle?
NEMO
2020-08-01 17:04:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I'd really love to dig up Margaret Thatcher and fuck her
fat rectum.
Phew! Enough already, you sick bastard!
BARRY Z. SHEIN jew paedophile of 700 Washington St B'righton Mass
2020-08-01 18:32:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 17:04:44 +0000 (UTC), NEMO aka jew paedophile
SHCUMBAG SHPAMMER Barry Z. Shein hat geshrivn:

<fluhs jew shite>

Fuck orf, jewboi!

Don't you got any little circumcished jew shubkiddiesh to diddle?

BUTT REGARDLESSH...let'sh CONTINUE with the MERCILESSH and
RELENTLESSH GOOGLEFUCKING of:
Your shleazy shlimy circumcished jew paedophile shyshadmin (ALSHO
called Baruch 'Barry' Shein)
Your, circumcished jew shishter Suzan F. Binder and her
circumcished jew hubby Marc W. Binder
Your, circumcished shitshke 'wife' Mary E. Riendeau Shein
Your, shenile circumcished jew mum Annie Shein (SHOOSH!)
Your, circumcished jew shub-uncle Hyman Shein (POP!)
Your, circumcished jew dad Shaul (LOLOK) Shein (zt"l/a"h since 1992)
and LASHT butt not LEASHT your, shubcherry-popped circumcished jew
shubnephew Zachary G. Binder!

Let the jewshaming© continue!

LOMPOP!
NEMO
2020-08-01 22:47:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Fuck orf, jewboi! And fuck the Queen Mother, too!
Why, sick paedo filth?
Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
2020-08-01 22:48:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by NEMO
Fuck orf, jewboi! And fuck the Queen Mother, too!
Why, sick paedo filth?
Why NOT, kike filth?
Dishgushted of Tunbridge Vellsh
2020-08-02 13:18:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 22:48:40 +0000 (UTC), jew paedophile SHCUMBAG
SHPAMMER Barry Z. Shein forging as Dishgushted of Tunbridge Vellsh
<***@shell02.TheWorld.com> hat geshrivn:

<fluhs jew shite>

Fuck orf, jewboi!

Don't you got any little circumcished jew shubkiddiesh to diddle?

BUTT REGARDLESSH...let'sh CONTINUE with the MERCILESSH and
RELENTLESSH GOOGLEFUCKING of:
Your shleazy shlimy circumcished jew paedophile shyshadmin (ALSHO
called Baruch 'Barry' Shein)
Your, circumcished jew shishter Suzan F. Binder and her
circumcished jew hubby Marc W. Binder
Your, circumcished shitshke 'wife' Mary E. Riendeau Shein
Your, shenile circumcished jew mum Annie Shein (SHOOSH!)
Your, circumcished jew shub-uncle Hyman Shein (POP!)
Your, circumcished jew dad Shaul (LOLOK) Shein (zt"l/a"h since 1992)
and LASHT butt not LEASHT your, shubcherry-popped circumcished jew
shubnephew Zachary G. Binder!

Let the jewshaming© continue!

LOMPOP!
BARRY Z. SHEIN jew paedophile of 700 Washington St B'righton Mass
2020-08-02 13:18:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 22:47:36 +0000 (UTC), NEMO aka jew paedophile
SHCUMBAG SHPAMMER Barry Z. Shein hat geshrivn:

<fluhs jew shite>

Fuck orf, jewboi!

Don't you got any little circumcished jew shubkiddiesh to diddle?

BUTT REGARDLESSH...let'sh CONTINUE with the MERCILESSH and
RELENTLESSH GOOGLEFUCKING of:
Your shleazy shlimy circumcished jew paedophile shyshadmin (ALSHO
called Baruch 'Barry' Shein)
Your, circumcished jew shishter Suzan F. Binder and her
circumcished jew hubby Marc W. Binder
Your, circumcished shitshke 'wife' Mary E. Riendeau Shein
Your, shenile circumcished jew mum Annie Shein (SHOOSH!)
Your, circumcished jew shub-uncle Hyman Shein (POP!)
Your, circumcished jew dad Shaul (LOLOK) Shein (zt"l/a"h since 1992)
and LASHT butt not LEASHT your, shubcherry-popped circumcished jew
shubnephew Zachary G. Binder!

Let the jewshaming© continue!

LOMPOP!
Joe
2020-07-30 20:34:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone
does, but I see that a 'storm' has broken out about the
comments made by some 'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people
don't like regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past
24 hours; he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but
also insisted they had fabricated the holocaust in order to get
preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments,
as I have known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the
concentration camps and the images they saw haunted them for the
rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was
just expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about
things that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared
to discuss and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared
to discuss them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want
to silence and censure him. That is the part that is deeply
worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you
mention a distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a
denier and the event never happened.
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
The question is: who wrote the history? It takes a relatively small
number of people to get a story straight and tell it to the rest of the
world. We all know that Epstein committed suicide in his cell. But how
many people actually know for certain if/how he died? I wasn't there,
and neither was nearly everybody in the world.

It is illegal in some countries to even question the official narrative
of the Holocaust. What does that tell you? It is hardly surprising that
many people question it.
--
Joe
Pancho
2020-07-30 21:08:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe
It is illegal in some countries to even question the official narrative
of the Holocaust. What does that tell you? It is hardly surprising that
many people question it.
Two Karl Poppers are named in the database of Holocaust victims.

Another one came up with a very sensible idea that we should only
believe theories that can be disproved, falsified.

Having people like David Irving actively try to disprove aspects of the
Holocaust, and fail, increases our confidence that they occurred.
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 08:03:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone
does, but I see that a 'storm' has broken out about the
comments made by some 'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people
don't like regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past
24 hours; he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but
also insisted they had fabricated the holocaust in order to get
preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments,
as I have known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the
concentration camps and the images they saw haunted them for the
rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was
just expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about
things that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared
to discuss and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared
to discuss them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want
to silence and censure him. That is the part that is deeply
worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you
mention a distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a
denier and the event never happened.
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
The question is: who wrote the history? It takes a relatively small
number of people to get a story straight and tell it to the rest of the
world. We all know that Epstein committed suicide in his cell. But how
many people actually know for certain if/how he died? I wasn't there,
and neither was nearly everybody in the world.
It is illegal in some countries to even question the official narrative
of the Holocaust. What does that tell you? It is hardly surprising that
many people question it.
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official narrative, and
insisting the entire subject was deliberately fabricated?
Joe
2020-07-31 09:43:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:03:37 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
(in
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone
does, but I see that a 'storm' has broken out about the
comments made by some 'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people
don't like regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the
past 24 hours; he didn't just link the jews to the slave
trade, but also insisted they had fabricated the holocaust in
order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter
comments, as I have known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some
of the concentration camps and the images they saw haunted
them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he
was just expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event.
Anyone should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to
have about things that happened in the past, particularly if
they are prepared to discuss and defend those views. I
understand that he is prepared to discuss them, apparently his
opponents are not - they only want to silence and censure him.
That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but
you mention a distant historical event. To judge by his comments,
he is a denier and the event never happened.
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
The question is: who wrote the history? It takes a relatively small
number of people to get a story straight and tell it to the rest of
the world. We all know that Epstein committed suicide in his cell.
But how many people actually know for certain if/how he died? I
wasn't there, and neither was nearly everybody in the world.
It is illegal in some countries to even question the official
narrative of the Holocaust. What does that tell you? It is hardly
surprising that many people question it.
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official
narrative, and insisting the entire subject was deliberately
fabricated?
Yes, but it's one of degree, not kind. If the official narrative is not
*completely* in accordance with the most reliable sources at the time,
and I'm not asserting that, then at least some of it is fabricated. We
do not know for sure how much is fabricated.

The reason that history is composed almost entirely of kings and queens
is that they are the vast majority of the history we can be reasonably
sure of.
--
Joe
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 10:21:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:03:37 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
(in
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone
does, but I see that a 'storm' has broken out about the
comments made by some 'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people
don't like regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the
past 24 hours; he didn't just link the jews to the slave
trade, but also insisted they had fabricated the holocaust in
order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter
comments, as I have known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some
of the concentration camps and the images they saw haunted
them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he
was just expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event.
Anyone should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to
have about things that happened in the past, particularly if
they are prepared to discuss and defend those views. I
understand that he is prepared to discuss them, apparently his
opponents are not - they only want to silence and censure him.
That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but
you mention a distant historical event. To judge by his comments,
he is a denier and the event never happened.
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
The question is: who wrote the history? It takes a relatively small
number of people to get a story straight and tell it to the rest of
the world. We all know that Epstein committed suicide in his cell.
But how many people actually know for certain if/how he died? I
wasn't there, and neither was nearly everybody in the world.
It is illegal in some countries to even question the official
narrative of the Holocaust. What does that tell you? It is hardly
surprising that many people question it.
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official
narrative, and insisting the entire subject was deliberately
fabricated?
Yes,
Good. That was my point.
Post by Joe
but it's one of degree, not kind. If the official narrative is not
*completely* in accordance with the most reliable sources at the time,
and I'm not asserting that, then at least some of it is fabricated. We
do not know for sure how much is fabricated.
Which is not an excuse for insisting the whole event never happened.
Post by Joe
The reason that history is composed almost entirely of kings and queens
is that they are the vast majority of the history we can be reasonably
sure of.
Or possibly because few other people could write?
Joe
2020-07-31 12:50:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 11:21:26 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Joe
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:03:37 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
(in
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
(in
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why
anyone does, but I see that a 'storm' has broken out
about the comments made by some 'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain
people don't like regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over
the past 24 hours; he didn't just link the jews to the
slave trade, but also insisted they had fabricated the
holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when
creating or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter
comments, as I have known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered
some of the concentration camps and the images they saw
haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail,
he was just expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event.
Anyone should be able to have whatever opinion they choose
to have about things that happened in the past,
particularly if they are prepared to discuss and defend
those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to
silence and censure him. That is the part that is deeply
worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down,
but you mention a distant historical event. To judge by his
comments, he is a denier and the event never happened.
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
The question is: who wrote the history? It takes a relatively
small number of people to get a story straight and tell it to
the rest of the world. We all know that Epstein committed
suicide in his cell. But how many people actually know for
certain if/how he died? I wasn't there, and neither was nearly
everybody in the world.
It is illegal in some countries to even question the official
narrative of the Holocaust. What does that tell you? It is
hardly surprising that many people question it.
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official
narrative, and insisting the entire subject was deliberately
fabricated?
Yes,
Good. That was my point.
Post by Joe
but it's one of degree, not kind. If the official narrative is not
*completely* in accordance with the most reliable sources at the
time, and I'm not asserting that, then at least some of it is
fabricated. We do not know for sure how much is fabricated.
Which is not an excuse for insisting the whole event never happened.
As no poster here to my knowledge has. Something else you made up.
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Joe
The reason that history is composed almost entirely of kings and
queens is that they are the vast majority of the history we can be
reasonably sure of.
Or possibly because few other people could write?
It will not have been the kings and queens who wrote history.
Probably many of them were illiterate. Most likely are monks, who were
also generally familiar with calendars.
--
Joe
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 13:37:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Joe
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 11:21:26 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Joe
On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:03:37 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 21:12:40 +0100
Post by Keema's Nan
(in
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
(in
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why
anyone does, but I see that a 'storm' has broken out
about the comments made by some 'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain
people don't like regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over
the past 24 hours; he didn't just link the jews to the
slave trade, but also insisted they had fabricated the
holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when
creating or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter
comments, as I have known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered
some of the concentration camps and the images they saw
haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail,
he was just expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event.
Anyone should be able to have whatever opinion they choose
to have about things that happened in the past,
particularly if they are prepared to discuss and defend
those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to
silence and censure him. That is the part that is deeply
worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down,
but you mention a distant historical event. To judge by his
comments, he is a denier and the event never happened.
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite
history.
The question is: who wrote the history? It takes a relatively
small number of people to get a story straight and tell it to
the rest of the world. We all know that Epstein committed
suicide in his cell. But how many people actually know for
certain if/how he died? I wasn't there, and neither was nearly
everybody in the world.
It is illegal in some countries to even question the official
narrative of the Holocaust. What does that tell you? It is
hardly surprising that many people question it.
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official
narrative, and insisting the entire subject was deliberately
fabricated?
Yes,
Good. That was my point.
Post by Joe
but it's one of degree, not kind. If the official narrative is not
*completely* in accordance with the most reliable sources at the
time, and I'm not asserting that, then at least some of it is
fabricated. We do not know for sure how much is fabricated.
Which is not an excuse for insisting the whole event never happened.
As no poster here to my knowledge has. Something else you made up.
If you wish. As most people without a personal axe to grind would have
noticed by now, I only posted what I found on Twitter - I made nothing up.

Unlike yourself, of course, who appear determined to make up all manner of
false accusations against me.

But that is your problem. Not mine.
Post by Joe
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Joe
The reason that history is composed almost entirely of kings and
queens is that they are the vast majority of the history we can be
reasonably sure of.
Or possibly because few other people could write?
It will not have been the kings and queens who wrote history.
Maybe not, but they were wealthy enough to employ people who could read and
write.
Post by Joe
Probably many of them were illiterate. Most likely are monks, who were
also generally familiar with calendars.
Pancho
2020-07-31 09:57:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official narrative, and
insisting the entire subject was deliberately fabricated?
I see lots of talk of holocaust denial, but who has insisted the entire
subject was deliberately fabricated?

The thing that does seem to be deliberately fabricated is your
accusation of Wiley's holocaust denial. A fabrication coupled with a
little anecdote about how you knew someone affected by it, like you
think we haven't heard about it?
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 10:26:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pancho
Post by Keema's Nan
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official narrative, and
insisting the entire subject was deliberately fabricated?
I see lots of talk of holocaust denial, but who has insisted the entire
subject was deliberately fabricated?
The tweet which was repeated by a well known jewish person suggested
precisely that.

Apparently, it is thought to have been a fake and has been withdrawn together
with an abject apology.
Post by Pancho
The thing that does seem to be deliberately fabricated is your
accusation of Wiley's holocaust denial.
Are you trying to shoot the messenger? I only relayed what I found on
Twitter.
Post by Pancho
A fabrication coupled with a
little anecdote about how you knew someone affected by it, like you
think we haven't heard about it?
You seem to have a problem with my 'little anecdote’. Would you care to
explain what your problem is?
Algernon Goss-Custard
2020-07-31 14:32:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Pancho
Post by Keema's Nan
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official narrative, and
insisting the entire subject was deliberately fabricated?
I see lots of talk of holocaust denial, but who has insisted the entire
subject was deliberately fabricated?
The tweet which was repeated by a well known jewish person suggested
precisely that.
No such comment has been quoted (in its original form) on this thread.

As Pancho and others remark, few people insist that "the whole thing was
deliberately fabricated". They contest certain points, dispute numbers,
challenge particular sources or interpretations.
--
Algernon
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 14:56:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Algernon Goss-Custard
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Pancho
Post by Keema's Nan
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official narrative, and
insisting the entire subject was deliberately fabricated?
I see lots of talk of holocaust denial, but who has insisted the entire
subject was deliberately fabricated?
The tweet which was repeated by a well known jewish person suggested
precisely that.
No such comment has been quoted (in its original form) on this thread.
And where did anyone say it had been quoted on this thread?

Why all you people are wasting your time on a fake tweet, only you will know.
Post by Algernon Goss-Custard
As Pancho and others remark, few people insist that "the whole thing was
deliberately fabricated". They contest certain points, dispute numbers,
challenge particular sources or interpretations.
And round and round we go.....
Algernon Goss-Custard
2020-07-31 20:07:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Algernon Goss-Custard
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Pancho
Post by Keema's Nan
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official
narrative,
and
insisting the entire subject was deliberately fabricated?
I see lots of talk of holocaust denial, but who has insisted the entire
subject was deliberately fabricated?
The tweet which was repeated by a well known jewish person suggested
precisely that.
No such comment has been quoted (in its original form) on this thread.
And where did anyone say it had been quoted on this thread?
I don't think they did, explicitly. Nevertheless I feel able to draw
unfavourable attention to the fact that you founded your rather
aggressive argument on a tweet that you never actually quoted, and when
you were called out on it you backed away.
Post by Keema's Nan
Why all you people are wasting your time on a fake tweet, only you will know.
No, we all know. It's because you originally cited it.
--
Algernon
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 20:56:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Algernon Goss-Custard
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Algernon Goss-Custard
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Pancho
Post by Keema's Nan
Do you not see any difference between questioning the official
narrative,
and
insisting the entire subject was deliberately fabricated?
I see lots of talk of holocaust denial, but who has insisted the entire
subject was deliberately fabricated?
The tweet which was repeated by a well known jewish person suggested
precisely that.
No such comment has been quoted (in its original form) on this thread.
And where did anyone say it had been quoted on this thread?
I don't think they did, explicitly. Nevertheless I feel able to draw
unfavourable attention to the fact that you founded your rather
aggressive argument on a tweet that you never actually quoted, and when
you were called out on it you backed away.
Oh I see.

The only reason I did not paste it here, was because I hadn’t a clue how to
do that from a re-tweeted image.

If that doesn’t satisfy your perpetual confrontational attitude, then -
tough.
Post by Algernon Goss-Custard
Post by Keema's Nan
Why all you people are wasting your time on a fake tweet, only you will know.
No, we all know. It's because you originally cited it.
But you just accused me of backing away from citing it.

Heads you win, tails I lose; it seems.
Farmer Giles
2020-07-30 21:06:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
Well it is worrying that free speech is being shouted down, but you mention a
distant historical event. To judge by his comments, he is a denier and the
event never happened.
Why should he not 'deny' what he wishes to deny? It's an opinion - no
more, no less. Are you not in in favour of people freely expressing
their opinions?
Post by Keema's Nan
I’m not sure we should be defending people who wish to rewrite history.
Or those who wish to question or challenge it?
Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells
2020-07-30 20:34:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Farmer Giles
Post by Keema's Nan
Post by Farmer Giles
I don't use Twitter, and don't really understand why anyone does, but I
see that a 'storm' has broken out about the comments made by some
'rapper' called Wiley.
Apparently he has expressed an opinion that certain people don't like
regarding Jews and the slave trade.
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Whatever he said, and I haven't followed it in any detail, he was just
expressing an opinion - that is the whole point.
The holocaust was a - now fairly distant - historical event. Anyone
should be able to have whatever opinion they choose to have about things
that happened in the past, particularly if they are prepared to discuss
and defend those views. I understand that he is prepared to discuss
them, apparently his opponents are not - they only want to silence and
censure him. That is the part that is deeply worrying.
God forbid anyone should say something negative about the jews or any
of their sacred cows.
Algernon Goss-Custard
2020-07-30 20:12:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Which camps?
--
Algernon
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 07:53:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Algernon Goss-Custard
Post by Keema's Nan
I can understand a storm breaking out over those latter comments, as I have
known ex-WW2 soldiers who discovered some of the concentration camps and the
images they saw haunted them for the rest of their lives.
Which camps?
It was a long time ago, but I think Belsen was a name which cropped up.
Pancho
2020-07-30 20:50:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Keema's Nan
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
Yeah, I really don't understand what a retweet is? I thought Wiley was
permanently suspended from Twitter.

Do you have a cite? I have often found that what is claimed to have been
said is a very distorted version of what is actually said.

I have no idea what you (or Wiley) are talking about, but as an example
I could say that "I believe that people fabricated tales of the
Grenfill Tower fire in order to obtain compensation". Would that make me
a Grenfill Tower fire denier?

<https://news.sky.com/story/the-fraudsters-who-took-advantage-of-grenfell-11559444>
Keema's Nan
2020-07-31 08:12:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pancho
Post by Keema's Nan
From the retweets of offending material I have seen over the past 24 hours;
he didn't just link the jews to the slave trade, but also insisted they had
fabricated the holocaust in order to get preferential treatment when creating
or rehabilitating businesses after WW2.
Yeah, I really don't understand what a retweet is?
Oh dear. Such ignorance.
Post by Pancho
I thought Wiley was
permanently suspended from Twitter.
I suspect he is.
Post by Pancho
Do you have a cite?
What? No one else bothers to cite anything. We have to accept that their
opinions are fact.

Anyway, the original re-tweet has been deleted because it is now alleged to
have been a fake.
Post by Pancho
I have often found that what is claimed to have been
said is a very distorted version of what is actually said.
I have no idea what you (or Wiley) are talking about, but as an example
I could say that "I believe that people fabricated tales of the
Grenfill Tower fire in order to obtain compensation". Would that make me
a Grenfill Tower fire denier?
Probably.
Post by Pancho
<https://news.sky.com/story/the-fraudsters-who-took-advantage-of-grenfell-1155
9444>
p***@gmail.com
2020-07-30 12:08:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Peter
If I were, presumably I
Post by Peter
would be called a racist for saying such negative things about Africans
and Arabs, and I would be forced out of whatever post I held.
You presume too much then :) It's a well travelled path, to hand is David Richardson, Suzanne Schwarz, and Anthony Tibbles, eds., Liverpool and Transatlantic Slavery (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2007) and Loveday and Schwartz, Slavery, Abolition and The Transition to Colonialism In Sierra Leone.
So, for example: "Recognizing the importance of [the black traders] William and James Cleveland to his business interests, the Liverpool merchant Robert Bostock sent his son to work with William Cleveland on the Banana Islands, off the southern portion of the peninsula. In her chapter, Denise Jones shows how Bostock's dependence on the Clevelands demonstrates the ways in which Bostock attempted to promote his interests over those of competing traders. Bostock's difficulties in redeeming debts from the Clevelands illustrates the financial insecurity of trading on this coast compared with Bonny in the Bight of Biafra, where centralized authority protected credit by enforcing payment of debts."
And lots more, really. There's a canon of academic literature emphasising the agency of African traders in the transatlantic slave trade.
What I was pointing out upthread is that the involvement of European traders hugely increased demand.
(I studied it, only as a module as an undergraduate, under Prof. Schwarz).
You've got to call him Professor The-S-Word now.
(a) no I don't
(b) Suzanne (her name's upthread) self-identifies as a woman
(c) your innate patriarchy is showing (that's a joke, btw)

Patrick
Keema's Nan
2020-07-30 13:01:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Peter
If I were, presumably I
Post by Peter
would be called a racist for saying such negative things about Africans
and Arabs, and I would be forced out of whatever post I held.
You presume too much then :) It's a well travelled path, to hand is David
Richardson, Suzanne Schwarz, and Anthony Tibbles, eds., Liverpool and
Transatlantic Slavery (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2007) and
Loveday and Schwartz, Slavery, Abolition and The Transition to Colonialism
In Sierra Leone.
So, for example: "Recognizing the importance of [the black traders]
William and James Cleveland to his business interests, the Liverpool
merchant Robert Bostock sent his son to work with William Cleveland on the
Banana Islands, off the southern portion of the peninsula. In her chapter,
Denise Jones shows how Bostock's dependence on the Clevelands demonstrates
the ways in which Bostock attempted to promote his interests over those of
competing traders. Bostock's difficulties in redeeming debts from the
Clevelands illustrates the financial insecurity of trading on this coast
compared with Bonny in the Bight of Biafra, where centralized authority
protected credit by enforcing payment of debts."
And lots more, really. There's a canon of academic literature emphasising
the agency of African traders in the transatlantic slave trade.
What I was pointing out upthread is that the involvement of European
traders hugely increased demand.
(I studied it, only as a module as an undergraduate, under Prof. Schwarz).
You've got to call him Professor The-S-Word now.
(a) no I don't
(b) Suzanne (her name's upthread) self-identifies as a woman
(c) your innate patriarchy is showing (that's a joke, btw)
Patrick
Are there any stats for how many men identifying as women, compared with how
many women are identifying as men?
Pamela
2020-08-03 10:39:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Peter
If I were, presumably I
would be called a racist for saying such negative things about Africans
and Arabs, and I would be forced out of whatever post I held.
You presume too much then :) It's a well travelled path, to hand is
David Richardson, Suzanne Schwarz, and Anthony Tibbles, eds., Liverpool
and Transatlantic Slavery (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2007)
and Loveday and Schwartz, Slavery, Abolition and The Transition to
Colonialism In Sierra Leone.
So, for example: "Recognizing the importance of [the black traders]
William and James Cleveland to his business interests, the Liverpool
merchant Robert Bostock sent his son to work with William Cleveland on
the Banana Islands, off the southern portion of the peninsula. In her
chapter, Denise Jones shows how Bostock's dependence on the Clevelands
demonstrates the ways in which Bostock attempted to promote his
interests over those of competing traders. Bostock's difficulties in
redeeming debts from the Clevelands illustrates the financial insecurity
of trading on this coast compared with Bonny in the Bight of Biafra,
where centralized authority protected credit by enforcing payment of
debts."
And lots more, really. There's a canon of academic literature
emphasising the agency of African traders in the transatlantic slave
trade.
What I was pointing out upthread is that the involvement of European
traders hugely increased demand.
(I studied it, only as a module as an undergraduate, under Prof. Schwarz).
Patrick
That shows the British set up an adminstrative office offshore from Sierra
Leone but it doesn't show Brits were rounding up slaves in Africa for
shipment.

That essential first step was undertaken by African and Arab slave
traders. Why do we now underplay their involvement?
p***@gmail.com
2020-08-03 15:27:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Pamela
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Peter
If I were, presumably I
would be called a racist for saying such negative things about Africans
and Arabs, and I would be forced out of whatever post I held.
You presume too much then :) It's a well travelled path, to hand is
David Richardson, Suzanne Schwarz, and Anthony Tibbles, eds., Liverpool
and Transatlantic Slavery (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2007)
and Loveday and Schwartz, Slavery, Abolition and The Transition to
Colonialism In Sierra Leone.
So, for example: "Recognizing the importance of [the black traders]
William and James Cleveland to his business interests, the Liverpool
merchant Robert Bostock sent his son to work with William Cleveland on
the Banana Islands, off the southern portion of the peninsula. In her
chapter, Denise Jones shows how Bostock's dependence on the Clevelands
demonstrates the ways in which Bostock attempted to promote his
interests over those of competing traders. Bostock's difficulties in
redeeming debts from the Clevelands illustrates the financial insecurity
of trading on this coast compared with Bonny in the Bight of Biafra,
where centralized authority protected credit by enforcing payment of
debts."
And lots more, really. There's a canon of academic literature
emphasising the agency of African traders in the transatlantic slave
trade.
What I was pointing out upthread is that the involvement of European
traders hugely increased demand.
(I studied it, only as a module as an undergraduate, under Prof. Schwarz).
Patrick
That shows the British set up an adminstrative office offshore from Sierra
Leone but it doesn't show Brits were rounding up slaves in Africa for
shipment.
You misunderstand me, I wasn't suggesting they were.

What I was demonstrating to previous posts and posters is examples to show that Africans were an essential part of the transatlantic slave trade ('African Agency').
Post by Pamela
That essential first step was undertaken by African and Arab slave
traders.
Yes (though it's arguable that over time the 'first step' was the European demand - push pull economic factors)
Post by Pamela
Why do we now underplay their involvement?
I don't know that we do, as examples of Africans above show (I'm less well versed in the Barbary trade to comment on Arab slave trading, my only knowledge is the James Irving enslavement).

The difference I guess is twofold. From embarkation it was a racial enslavement and supremacy, whites enslaved blacks. The second is the extent to which arguments of African Agency can be used to deflect or diminish European responsibility for the transatlantic slave trade and plantation economy.


Patrick
Pamela
2020-08-04 12:02:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Pamela
Post by p***@gmail.com
If I were, presumably I would be called a racist for saying such
negative things about Africans and Arabs, and I would be forced out
of whatever post I held.
You presume too much then :) It's a well travelled path, to hand is
David Richardson, Suzanne Schwarz, and Anthony Tibbles, eds.,
Liverpool and Transatlantic Slavery (Liverpool: Liverpool University
Press, 2007) and Loveday and Schwartz, Slavery, Abolition and The
Transition to Colonialism In Sierra Leone.
So, for example: "Recognizing the importance of [the black traders]
William and James Cleveland to his business interests, the Liverpool
merchant Robert Bostock sent his son to work with William Cleveland
on the Banana Islands, off the southern portion of the peninsula. In
her chapter, Denise Jones shows how Bostock's dependence on the
Clevelands demonstrates the ways in which Bostock attempted to
promote his interests over those of competing traders. Bostock's
difficulties in redeeming debts from the Clevelands illustrates the
financial insecurity of trading on this coast compared with Bonny in
the Bight of Biafra, where centralized authority protected credit by
enforcing payment of debts."
And lots more, really. There's a canon of academic literature
emphasising the agency of African traders in the transatlantic slave
trade.
What I was pointing out upthread is that the involvement of European
traders hugely increased demand.
(I studied it, only as a module as an undergraduate, under Prof. Schwarz).
Patrick
That shows the British set up an adminstrative office offshore from
Sierra Leone but it doesn't show Brits were rounding up slaves in
Africa for shipment.
You misunderstand me, I wasn't suggesting they were.
What I was demonstrating to previous posts and posters is examples to
show that Africans were an essential part of the transatlantic slave
trade ('African Agency').
Post by Pamela
That essential first step was undertaken by African and Arab slave
traders.
Yes (though it's arguable that over time the 'first step' was the
European demand - push pull economic factors)
I suggest the first step was the widespread practice by Africans
and Arabs to enslave other Africans which took place for centuries without
British involvement. The second step was when Europeans, including the
British, bought what the slavers were offering. In time, Britain became
one of the first nations to distance itself from any involvement and also
to forcibly prevent others taking part.
Post by p***@gmail.com
Post by Pamela
Why do we now underplay their involvement?
I don't know that we do, as examples of Africans above show (I'm less
well versed in the Barbary trade to comment on Arab slave trading, my
only knowledge is the James Irving enslavement).
The difference I guess is twofold. From embarkation it was a racial
enslavement and supremacy, whites enslaved blacks. The second is the
extent to which arguments of African Agency can be used to deflect or
diminish European responsibility for the transatlantic slave trade and
plantation economy.
Patrick
Modern day descendents of slaves should direct their attentions and
grievances first towards Africans and Arabs but such a thing gets entirely
overlooked. It plays better to the modern black racist agenda that blacks
accuse whites of sins their own people were committing.

Not that modern day black descendents of the slavers much care. In a 2018
article called "My Great-Grandfather, the Nigerian Slave-Trader", a black
women says "I can never be ashamed of him. Why should I be? His business
was legitimate at the time. He was respected by everyone around."

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/personal-history/my-great-grandfather-
the
-nigerian-slave-trader

c***@gmail.com
2020-07-31 18:10:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
As a child I never equated gollies with black people.

A golliwog was just another fabric character that we kids were given to play with, in the same vein as teddy bears and dolls.

Wasn’t there a golliwog in the Noddy books? I never thought of him as some
racial interloper.

Apparently now, I can’t sing certain nursery rhymes to my grandkids because
they might be frightened. Three Blind Mice, for instance; because it contains
the line “she cut off their tails with a carving knife”. I can’t remember being traumatised by that vision as a child.

It was just one of those things that we happily sang - we never thought too deeply about the lyrics.

And my generation grew up with a backbone and so aren't mentally traumatised by not being able to post a status update to Facebook because the internet has gone down.
Ian Jackson
2020-08-01 09:59:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
Wasn’t there a golliwog in the Noddy books? I never thought of him as some
racial interloper.
Yebbut.......
Wasn't he a bit of a villain?
--
Ian
Loading...