now the pubs supposed to be in “the glasgow area”..
maybe in Blantyre? cause it aint a place youd go for “a day out”.

Like most thought police advocates Hassan, you always ’suspect’ the worst. It tickles me to imagine you with your little pointy hat on pontificating about ‘turds’ and ‘letterboxes’.

Explains what, precisely? That it’s illegal to exclude blacks from pubs because of the colour of their skin? To harass Jews because of their dress? To push turds through Asian letter boxes? I have a great deal of problems with the CRE and its successor body, but I am proud of its work in helping people use the law to stop direct discrimination and rather suspect that you don’t feel the term “bigotry” don’t apply to the cases above.

Which explains so much…

the CRE

To employ the language of the organisation formerly known as the CRE: ‘The CRE and its successor the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, are institutionally racist; rather than diminishing racial discrimination and promoting a more cohesive society, such institutions, true to Orwell, perpetuate bigotry for their own self-serving ends.

Yes, I do. It’s extremely pertinent. With due respect to the excellent work that Mr Standing undertakes here and elsewhere exposing the BNP for the thugs that they are, one has to be consistent or else it makes a mockery of any concerted effort to promote the view that racial discrimination is wrong. It either is or it isn’t. Any argument to the contrary, for example that ’some’ ‘ethnic and religious minorities’ are somehow marginalised despite no objective, empirical evidence for this, strikes me as moral equivalence.

It seems to me that the same people who argue that non-violent extremists should be co-opted and their views promulgated (roundly condemned here on HP) commit the same logical fallacy as those who justify some forms of racial discrimination.

The NBPA and their multitude of supporters and apologists base their rationale on the same entrenched racist attitudes of which the far-right are accused.

I think you would do well to draw the attention of the licensing authorities to these pubs. It’s against the law. I used to work for the CRE and even then it was against the Race Relations Act 1976 to refuse to serve someone in a pub on the grounds of race. If they were a private club, that might be a different matter, but they’ve stated their wish to be open to the general public.

Did the licensee tell the licensing authorities that it was to be an all-white pub, or that it was connected with the RVF? I suspect that it won’t be long before the police or neighbours are seeking its closure on grounds of disturbing the peace.

So do you think it is a pertinant analogy?

Sy

‘a SocialPublican’

remove the space