[DavidGordon10]

To repeat, I am going to go quiet for a while, and (as Dr Johnson would say) there’s an end on’t.

[FDOS_UK]

You posed a question, David, I responded to it.

It’s your choice, whether you choose to post or not.

I shared an offer that saved money for BA bookings, recently. I’ll keep sharing, if I think I can help, that’s my choice.

Stay safe.

[capetonianm]

Since I seem to be the principal target of DavidGordon’s posting, even though he doesn’t mention me by name, I’ll respond. The postings he mentions and clearly finds ‘inappropriate’ are mine. I make no apology or retraction for my comments. Maybe I am also the person he refers to as ‘Mr Allwaysknowsbest Musthavethelastword’ or maybe that’s someone else. If he means me, I’ll take that on the chin too. Life would be so much simpler if people would be a bit more forthright instead of using circumlocutions, which are really not necessary.

I have no idea what DG means by ‘dog-whistling’ but I take it to mean inflammatory. I accept that some people may find my comments ‘unacceptable’ or ‘inappropriate’ but they are opinions I am entitled to hold and express openly. They are not racist since they do not mention any particular grouping, neither race, nor creed, nor nationality. That said, you can draw your own conclusions in regard to whom I am referring.

The open borders policy is a charter for free and unfettered movement of criminals of all types, many of whom have entered the Schengen area illegally and with no accountability. May I ask DG if he would leave his home open and unattended for all and sundry to take up occupation and help themselves to his property? It is, of course, a rhetorical question because we know the answer.

People like you and I benefit from open borders/Schengen as we breeze across the continent without border checks. That’s the perception anyway, but as our safety and security are threatened, do we place a greater value on the freedom of movement or on our safety?

In my view, and clearly I’m not alone, Frau Merkel’s policies are madness and will do major long term damage to western civilisation and security. History will, I suspect, judge her harshly. Certainly the people of Europe will.

I grew up in a country which had institutionalised racism as a policy. Contrary to the beliefs of many, it still does, the difference being now that it is worse than before. I probably know more about racism than most of you here, so I don’t need the lecture or the preaching. As an aside, ‘democracy’ in South Africa and Rhodesia has worsened the plight of the huge majority of people for whom it was supposed to have brought a better and more dignified life.

I am guilty of ‘frog-bashing’ to use DG’s inappropriate term. As someone who is frequently inconvenienced and left out of pocket by the incessant industrial action that takes place in France, I feel again I have the right to express the grievances I feel. It is rather a large country and difficult to avoid when you travel in Europe. Nor am I a great fan of the French and the way they do things, and again having had the misfortune to have worked with them for some years, I possibly know more about that some others.

If we are to avoid contentious discussion on the excellent BT Forum, then we can move to one which allows simply the presentation of facts and no discussion or expression of views and opinions.

That would be almost as boring as the football context which, thankfully, is over for another four years.

I am not prepared to have my freedom of expression curtailed just because some of my views may offend some people. If the BT Forum moderators or a majority of the contributors here disagree with me, then I’m out of here. I have very little to gain from this forum other than a certain camaraderie from some other members, since I am more than capable of sourcing the best deals and so on as and when I need them. This may well sound conceited, but I have probably contributed more to these forums, and I enjoy doing so, than I have gained.

Awaiting comment!

[capetonianm]

After writing the above I thought I’d investigate the meaning of ‘dog-whistling’.

A dog whistle can also be words that may cause minorities to be insulted even though they sound normal to many people. Words like Chicago, golfing, vacation, and lazy are now considered Dog Whistles.
The term dog whistle is just another form of political correctness.

Well, there’s a surprise! I despise political correctness and those who self-righteously and hypocritically expound it.

By the way since I can’t edit my posting above, ‘football context’ was obviously a typo for ‘football contest’.

[canucklad]

To let you know I’ve posted the following on 2 seemingly related threads ……

Isn’t it a bit of a conundrum we find ourselves in ………

1 poster makes a comment covertly suggesting something or another.
Another poster interprets the same comment as an overt attack on a particular group.

THE QUESTION HAS TO BE ……Which poster is demonstrating racist beliefs ?
After all ,to take a deliberately ambiguous response and attach an ethnic group to it ( like I did) seems to be recognizing our own rooted sub conscious bias !

And as Jules61 says , if we remain neutral then opinion has the risk of becoming fact !!

And my opinion on the original statement by Alex…..
It’s nothing new, in my extensive travels through Europe, and to a lesser extent the world ……
I feel less safe in Paris, Berlin and Milan than any other city I’ve visited …….
As brilliant as Paris is as a destination, always makes me feel on edge more than any other city.

Why ? well that’s my personal belief system kicking in !!

1 user thanked author for this post.

Ekond222

[LuganoPirate]

My son sent me this:

1300’s – I’m dying of Black Plague
1800’s – I’m working 16 hour days
1900’s – I’m off to fight a war
2000’s – I’m offended ;-(

3 users thanked author for this post.

FDOS_UK, GivingupBA, Swissdiver

[Charles-P]

It was I think Ricky Gervais who said,
Just because you are offended doesn’t mean you are right

Some months ago I was in London attending a board meeting of a company I have a small interest in, we had an HR problem with an employee who had escalated her complaint right up to the CEO. In simple terms she had been told by her manager she was doing a poor job and needed to improve. Suggestions for improvement were made but she rejected all of them and wrote an email to HR saying that she found the meeting “offensive” and she wanted her manager to be disciplined. She ended up being sacked and is now taking the company to Court with the basis of her claim that she was “insulted”.

What kind of society have we created ?

[CathayLoyalist2]

Probably off topic but the society Charles-P above referred to has too many of the following (just a small selection):- people who know their rights but who forget, or are ignorant of the fact, that rights go hand in hand with responsibilities, political correctness in decision making because the decision maker lacks a spine/backbone to do the obviously right thing, schools that have abandoned sports days because there cannot be any losers (!!) and victims of whatever misdeed are treated as second class citizens whilst perpetrators seem to enjoy unlimited access to various support services. There are numerous other examples but I´ll stop there. If we look at some of the posts here broadly complaining, and justifiably so, about poor to terrible service we see many responses from providers that are downright insulting. I am of an age whereby standing on your own two feet was the order of the day and you just got on with things. Given my real surname attracts much humour, by today´s standards of people being so easily offended I might have topped myself !!. That said the surname is a great conversation starter/stopper!!

1 user thanked author for this post.

Ahmad

[DavidGordon10]

I am breaking my self-imposed silence (posts 44 and 46) to reply to one or two things, but mainly to answer one important point.

FDOS answered my question: thank you, but the question was rhetorical and did not really need an answer.

Capetonian replies in detail. Our disagreement is fundamental; I think this forum should mainly be for practical and factual information, and also for interesting experiences and anecdote, but not for unrestrained “freedom of expression”; he does not want his freedom of expression curtailed. Freedom of expression is essential, but not at the price of using language that some find unacceptable. His definition of “dog-whistle” is rather limited, a much better one is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics What kind of “political correctness” is stupid is a moot point. My children and the staff of my organisation find me very politically incorrect – but humorous – at times.

The important point I want to answer is the one raised by Charles-P. “What kind of society have we created?” Well, I hope a more tolerant and understanding one than we had not many years ago. However, the use of claims of discrimination, by some individuals when they have no good cause is completely unacceptable. I have had to deal with this more than once: the most egregious case was a person who claimed that he had been passed over for promotion because he was of Asian origin. It had to be dealt with very firmly, and with clear evidence. I had to tell him he was not ready for promotion, explain exactly why, and tell him that the full force of our lawyers would deal with him if he tried to sue. He shut up and got on with the task of doing good work so that when he was ready he was promoted.

I will now return to silence and try and stay that way.

[SimonS1]

With such a diversified range of views on most topics you really cannot win on an internet forum.

Either you have the BT model with light touch moderation (people moan about the content and certain posters dominating every discussion) or the more hands-on moderation of places like FT (people moan about posts being deleted).

Personally I read/post less these days due to the clunky technology and the tendency of certain posters to dominate discussion which can get quite tedious. On the other hand I do accept that if you don’t like it, the best thing to do is turn off.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Johnnyg, Ahmad, Marc_ACB, Henryp1

[Henryp1]

I always believe that if I haven’t got anything pleasant or positive to say, then there’s little point in being rude, spiteful or nasty in an anonymous forum where few posters actually know each other, or the declared credentials of posters cannot be accurately known. This has the potential of any meaningful debate to be less factual.

The forums I enjoy the most and gain the best information and debate are closed forums, where everyone knows everyone’s real name and true background and we can discuss and debate openly. Moderation is undertaken by the group if required.

3 users thanked author for this post.

canucklad, Marc_ACB, MartynSinclair

[FDOS_UK]

where few posters actually know each other

You are making a judgment there, are you sure that few posters actually know each other?

[LuganoPirate]

[quote quote=876230]Given my real surname attracts much humour[/quote]

My sons teacher was called Mr. Hardick to the perpetual amusement of all. In fact in school reports sent out by the head he was often referred to as “the teacher with the unfortunate name!” He was never offended by it.

It also reminds me of the old schoolboy joke retold with much merriment, “May I introduce you, Mr. Bates, Mrs. Bates and their son Master…..”

[Ahmad]

I had a University Professor called Alcock, not that it mattered much to everyone other than a few mischievous scoundrels who used to comment on his alleged gender orientation.

[FDOS_UK]

[quote quote=876531]I had a University Professor called Alcock, not that it mattered much to everyone other than a few mischievous scoundrels who used to comment on his alleged gender orientation.[/quote]

Presumably some prat will come along and be offended, saying that Alcock and Brown is a dog whistle, not the pioneers of transatlantic aviation.

[Author]

Posts