So when is that arshole...

[koalabear]

http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/the wave.GIF

 

[p_p_man]

http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/the wave.GIF

These are the ones who didn't pass the medical.

There's something wrong with them, don't know what, but it'll come to me eventually...

 

[p_p_man]

Re: you suck!

Margaret Thatcher was the best PM Britain ever had

Oh Lordy...

Yo' hush yo' mouth now...

ppman

 

[bluespoke]

Re: you suck!

Margaret Thatcher was the best PM Britain ever had and had more "balls" than all of your wimp-ass Prime Ministers you've had since her combined!

If she was so good why didn't you take her as president and leave us in peace.

This is the woman who taxed part of the country as an experiment and then provoked mass civil unrest by introducing the same tax in the rest of the country when everyone told her it was wrong.

This was the woman who took us deeper into Europe and now rants about the evils of Europe.

Best primeminister my ass!

 

[freescorfr]

Personally, if I had the wealth I would ensure Maggie was prosecuted, privately if necessary, for the murder of the boys on the Belgrano, the Irish in Gibraltar, the ambush of the minibus in - I'd have to find out where in N. Ireland and the murder of innocent Lybian men, women and children.
As a British citizen I still feel abhorence that my Prime Minister was responsible for these murders.

As with everyone, there was some good, good things which at the time I did not perceive, but these murders were evil acts of domination diproportionate to any threat to the country, its citizens or its armed forces.

 

[miles]

phrodeau

Originally posted by p_p_man


True DannyBoyUK...

But we are guests on an American site...

What the Americans know about UK politics you can write on the back of a postage stamp...

So I tend to keep things simple...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Isn't that just a tad bigoted?



Yes, in it's purest form. Single out a group and make a broad generalization about them. People need to look closely at what some Lit posters really say here, and you'll see many kettles calling the pots black. As a experiment, try substituting words like black, gay, women, or Hispanic for the word American in peepee's post.

 

[phrodeau]

Thanks, miles. That's exactly what I did.

America has a substantial immigrant population (somewhere near 100%) and many follow the news from their home countries. Apart from that, millions of Americans (and not just ex-pats) are deeply concerned with the Troubles in Ireland, for one example.

 

[District Line]

Why is p_p_man being accused of bigotry because of that statement ? It's not put in a diplomatic manner but is he actually wrong ?

Framed differently, is the following statement more likely to be true or false:

Most Americans are knowledeable about U.K. politics.

Now there are lots of things I respect about America but come on, does anyone seriously believe that most Americans have good knowledge of U.K. politics ? Come on, I mean really, why would they.

So if it is true that most Americans do not have a good knowledge of U.K. politics, then why is that statement bigoted ?

 

[bluespoke]

So if it is true that most Americans do not have a good knowledge of U.K. politics, then why is that statement bigoted ? [/B]

p_p did not say 'most'.

On an American site he said 'Americans'. Thus suggesting, intentionally or not, Americans on this site.

Americans on this site are more likely to know about British politics.

 

[ExLimey]

Personally, if I had the wealth I would ensure Maggie was prosecuted, privately if necessary, for the murder of the boys on the Belgrano

Should we have waited until the Belgrano blew the snot out of a bunch of Royal Navy destroyers with the equivalent of pea-shooters first? It was a war after all. I don't necessarily like it but the Argentines did start it, we just finished it. Would you prosecute the Argentine pilots for killing all those Welsh Guards on Sir Galahad?

 

[District Line]

p_p did not say 'most'.

On an American site he said 'Americans'. Thus suggesting, intentionally or not, Americans on this site.

Americans on this site are more likely to know about British politics.

It is true that he didn't use explicity the term 'most' but surely that is the implicit meaning.

He certainly didn't explicitly quantify the statement universally. That is, he certainly didn't use the word 'ALL.' He didn't say it is true of 'ALL' Americans...

It is implausible that anyone would make a universal statement in that way because it would take only one Amercian to have a good knowledge of U.K. politics to prove a universal statement like that wrong.

So if he did not say it about 'ALL' Americans then he must have been saying it about 'SOME' Americans.

Now what range would that 'SOME' fall into ?

If the implicit meaning was SOME Americans... it is implausible that he said it about a 'minority' of Americans because then the statement would mean that a majority of Americans had a good knowledge of U.K. politics and no one would have been offended.

It is also highly unlikely he said it about exactly half of Americans.

Therefore it is logical to assume he said it about 'most' Americans.

However, lets consider your second point, lets say that statement was implicitly, only about Americans on this board. I'll pose then similar question to the one I did earlier.

Is the following statement more likely to be true or false:

Most Americans on this board are knowledeable about U.K. politics.

 

[Frimost]

Innocent Libyans? Now that is an oxymoron if I ever heard one!
As for the Falklands, you were at war, killing is what one does in time of war or they in return kill you!

As for the troubles in N. Ireland, there has been fighting and killings under the administrations of all of your Prim Ministers in the last 100-years! So why is she any different, why would you single her out?

Still the best IMO, but since I live here and not there my opinion is mainly formed by her tough foreign policy, which was superb IMO. I really don't have allot of working knowledge of her domestic policy. The same really goes for all country’s opinions of other nation's leaders, our opinions are mostly formed by how they treat us, and not they’re own constituents. So in short, I don’t know as much about Margaret as many of you do and you in turn don't know as much about George Bush jr. as I do. Capesh?

 

[phrodeau]

Why is p_p_man being accused of bigotry because of that statement ? It's not put in a diplomatic manner but is he actually wrong ?

Framed differently, is the following statement more likely to be true or false:

Most Americans are knowledeable about U.K. politics.

Now there are lots of things I respect about America but come on, does anyone seriously believe that most Americans have good knowledge of U.K. politics ? Come on, I mean really, why would they.

So if it is true that most Americans do not have a good knowledge of U.K. politics, then why is that statement bigoted ?

Did somebody accuse p_p_man of bigotry?

I suggested that his statement was "a tad bigoted", and I stand by my belief that it is, no more or less. Should anyone be making irrational assumptions about either his statement or my reply?

Most Americans are knowledgeable about U.K. politics.
You may accept that this is false, but if then you assume that because a person is American he won't have any substantial knowledge of UK politics, you are committing an error of logic. And if you disregard the value of American opinions based on that assumption, then you're bigoted.