RugbyRebels

cadofyddol wrote:

Nightynight wrote:By the way, I don't pay taxes, ME don't have any. But maybe you should get out and about a bit more than having spiv holidays in a caravan in north wales or a week in lanzorgrotte. Might broaden your mind a wee bit.

Oh dear. You don't know me from Adam, but are prepared to make wild assumptions. If you did know me you would see just how wide of the mark you were.
Come on Nighty, it's only the internet!

Enlighten me then

UKHamlet wrote:

Nightynight wrote:

Numbers wrote:There certainly seems to be a great deal of generalisation, whether Romany, New Age, Irish Traveller etc...apparently they are all the same, oh dear.

Should this be moved to the Politics thread as this is really not about Rugby anymore is it.

Agreed, maybe hammy should put up a vote, do you think travelers are a race?

We don't need to, because they're not, but they are an ethnically distinguishable minority and defined as such by law. What you think, what I think and what anyone else on the board thinks is so much hot air, because the law has already decided.

No guts then, afraid it my pop the ballon?

Nightynight wrote:

cadofyddol wrote:

Nightynight wrote:By the way, I don't pay taxes, ME don't have any. But maybe you should get out and about a bit more than having spiv holidays in a caravan in north wales or a week in lanzorgrotte. Might broaden your mind a wee bit.

Oh dear. You don't know me from Adam, but are prepared to make wild assumptions. If you did know me you would see just how wide of the mark you were.
Come on Nighty, it's only the internet!

Enlighten me then

I've been trying, but so far it's proved beyond me!

Been to North Wales many times, but never on a caravan holiday and even lived there for a bit. Some lovely areas and a few dog ends too. Not that I'd have an issue staying in a caravan, as I'm sure on the right site it would be great.

Never been to Lanzarote though, have always chosen other destinations for a holiday. I have heard some mixed reviews about the Canaries but think I will still probably check it out at some point to make my own mind up. I hear the islands are all very different, any that you would recommend?

Nightynight wrote:

UKHamlet wrote:

Nightynight wrote:
Agreed, maybe hammy should put up a vote, do you think travelers are a race?

We don't need to, because they're not, but they are an ethnically distinguishable minority and defined as such by law. What you think, what I think and what anyone else on the board thinks is so much hot air, because the law has already decided.

No guts then, afraid it my pop the ballon?

What's that in English?

UKHamlet wrote:

Nightynight wrote:

UKHamlet wrote:
We don't need to, because they're not, but they are an ethnically distinguishable minority and defined as such by law. What you think, what I think and what anyone else on the board thinks is so much hot air, because the law has already decided.

No guts then, afraid it my pop the ballon?

What's that in English?

Put it up for vote? What is the issue?

cadofyddol wrote:

Nightynight wrote:

cadofyddol wrote:
Oh dear. You don't know me from Adam, but are prepared to make wild assumptions. If you did know me you would see just how wide of the mark you were.
Come on Nighty, it's only the internet!

Enlighten me then

I've been trying, but so far it's proved beyond me!

Been to North Wales many times, but never on a caravan holiday and even lived there for a bit. Some lovely areas and a few dog ends too. Not that I'd have an issue staying in a caravan, as I'm sure on the right site it would be great.

Never been to Lanzarote though, have always chosen other destinations for a holiday. I have heard some mixed reviews about the Canaries but think I will still probably check it out at some point to make my own mind up. I hear the islands are all very different, any that you would recommend?

Well done.

It's not the answer mind, please advise me why I making the wrong assumption, since you have not answered any question with a straight yes or no

Nightynight wrote:There has been a review of the situation and warning given, the player apologised the other involved player accepted it. move on, if nothing had been done then I would understand the complaints but it was dealt with, just because you don't like the result just sounds like sour grapes

...

cadofyddol wrote:

Nightynight wrote:There has been a review of the situation and warning given, the player apologised the other involved player accepted it. move on, if nothing had been done then I would understand the complaints but it was dealt with, just because you don't like the result just sounds like sour grapes

...

And
Still no proper yes or no.

Does a group that excludes itself on many levels from main stream society deserve the same rights.... Yes or no

You are the one giving it credence not me

Nightynight wrote:

cadofyddol wrote:

Nightynight wrote:There has been a review of the situation and warning given, the player apologised the other involved player accepted it. move on, if nothing had been done then I would understand the complaints but it was dealt with, just because you don't like the result just sounds like sour grapes

...

And
Still no proper yes or no.

Does a group that excludes itself on many levels from main stream society deserve the same rights.... Yes or no

Of course they do. Do you have to pay taxes in this country to enjoy the protection of the law? If so that millions on benefits who are excluded. Do you have to take a full part in society to enjoy protection - well what does that even mean? There are people in this country who can't speak English; they still deserve the full protection of the law.

Are you suggesting that if a group is somehow different they shouldn't enjoy the same rights as everyone else?

With regards to your point about the situation being reviewed, the only reason why WR got involved is because the 6N process was unclear. If they had originally treated it like a full disciplinary and provided the details of those who made the decision, and the rationale for not taking it further it probably would have stood. But they didn't, thats why WR got involved. Not so hard to understand.

Sandydragon wrote:

Nightynight wrote:

cadofyddol wrote: ...

And
Still no proper yes or no.

Does a group that excludes itself on many levels from main stream society deserve the same rights.... Yes or no

Of course they do. Do you have to pay taxes in this country to enjoy the protection of the law? If so that millions on benefits who are excluded. Do you have to take a full part in society to enjoy protection - well what does that even mean? There are people in this country who can't speak English; they still deserve the full protection of the law.

Are you suggesting that if a group is somehow different they shouldn't enjoy the same rights as everyone else?

With regards to your point about the situation being reviewed, the only reason why WR got involved is because the 6N process was unclear. If they had originally treated it like a full disciplinary and provided the details of those who made the decision, and the rationale for not taking it further it probably would have stood. But they didn't, thats why WR got involved. Not so hard to understand.

You are mixing straw man arguments, travelers are not immigrants. You equal life style choice to different ethnic origin and colour and religion. It doesn't stand in this case.

I wasn't asking you anyway

Nightynight wrote:

cadofyddol wrote:

Nightynight wrote:There has been a review of the situation and warning given, the player apologised the other involved player accepted it. move on, if nothing had been done then I would understand the complaints but it was dealt with, just because you don't like the result just sounds like sour grapes

...

And
Still no proper yes or no.

Does a group that excludes itself on many levels from main stream society deserve the same rights.... Yes or no

In terms of the same protection against 'racial' abuse - Yes.

There are groups of Asian people in this country who exclude themselves from main stream society and don't bother to learn English. In your opinion does that mean that it is acceptable to 'racially' abuse them?

Samson Lee doesn't exclude himself from mainstream society, why should his rights be affected by the actions of others?

Nighty this discussion is just going round and round in circles now. You have your opinion and I have mine. The six nations and the RFU agree with you, World Rugby agree with me. We both just keep repeating the same things so unless you bring something else to the discussion I'm going to leave it here as this is a rugby forum and our discussion is now off topic and like a broken record.

Nightynight wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Nightynight wrote: And
Still no proper yes or no.

Does a group that excludes itself on many levels from main stream society deserve the same rights.... Yes or no

Of course they do. Do you have to pay taxes in this country to enjoy the protection of the law? If so that millions on benefits who are excluded. Do you have to take a full part in society to enjoy protection - well what does that even mean? There are people in this country who can't speak English; they still deserve the full protection of the law.

Are you suggesting that if a group is somehow different they shouldn't enjoy the same rights as everyone else?

With regards to your point about the situation being reviewed, the only reason why WR got involved is because the 6N process was unclear. If they had originally treated it like a full disciplinary and provided the details of those who made the decision, and the rationale for not taking it further it probably would have stood. But they didn't, thats why WR got involved. Not so hard to understand.

You are mixing straw man arguments, travelers are not immigrants. You equal life style choice to different ethnic origin and colour and religion. It doesn't stand in this case.

Sorry can't help myself, I just find your logic and arguments incredulous.

Isn't religion a lifestyle choice? What if someone coverts to Islam?

Why do you have to be an immigrant, what is an immigrant? What if you're 4th generation Asian, are you still an immigrant? Is Anthony Watson an immigrant, what about Dylan Hartley?

Nightynight wrote:I wasn't asking you anyway

This is a forum. People post opinions and other people respond.

If you post a message it is open for anyone to respond. If you only want certain people to respond take it to pm!

Nightynight wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Nightynight wrote: And
Still no proper yes or no.

Does a group that excludes itself on many levels from main stream society deserve the same rights.... Yes or no

Of course they do. Do you have to pay taxes in this country to enjoy the protection of the law? If so that millions on benefits who are excluded. Do you have to take a full part in society to enjoy protection - well what does that even mean? There are people in this country who can't speak English; they still deserve the full protection of the law.

Are you suggesting that if a group is somehow different they shouldn't enjoy the same rights as everyone else?

With regards to your point about the situation being reviewed, the only reason why WR got involved is because the 6N process was unclear. If they had originally treated it like a full disciplinary and provided the details of those who made the decision, and the rationale for not taking it further it probably would have stood. But they didn't, thats why WR got involved. Not so hard to understand.

You are mixing straw man arguments, travelers are not immigrants. You equal life style choice to different ethnic origin and colour and religion. It doesn't stand in this case.

Im not suggesting that all travelers are immigrants, just pointing out the absurdity of your argument that one needs to participate and/or pay taxes to receive full legal protection in this country. The principle in this country is that all people deserve legal protection, its that simple.

cadofyddol wrote:

Nightynight wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Of course they do. Do you have to pay taxes in this country to enjoy the protection of the law? If so that millions on benefits who are excluded. Do you have to take a full part in society to enjoy protection - well what does that even mean? There are people in this country who can't speak English; they still deserve the full protection of the law.

Are you suggesting that if a group is somehow different they shouldn't enjoy the same rights as everyone else?

With regards to your point about the situation being reviewed, the only reason why WR got involved is because the 6N process was unclear. If they had originally treated it like a full disciplinary and provided the details of those who made the decision, and the rationale for not taking it further it probably would have stood. But they didn't, thats why WR got involved. Not so hard to understand.

You are mixing straw man arguments, travelers are not immigrants. You equal life style choice to different ethnic origin and colour and religion. It doesn't stand in this case.

Sorry can't help myself, I just find your logic and arguments incredulous.

Isn't religion a lifestyle choice? What if someone coverts to Islam?

Why do you have to be an immigrant, what is an immigrant? What if you're 4th generation Asian, are you still an immigrant? Is Anthony Watson an immigrant, what about Dylan Hartley?

In this instance, I think the suggestion is that they deserve all the abuse they get. If they happen to be unemployed as well then its open season.

Does a group has been in Europe for centuries/ decades that doesn't pay I t's due on many levels and only interacts with the wider society on its own terms, deserve the rights and privileges of the main stream, you keep posting without answering the question?


Yes or no?

Fucking hell.

WaspInWales wrote:Fucking hell.

If you are in hell and doing that, would you be eligible for treatment under the NHS if you caught something?

oldbackrow wrote:If you are in hell and doing that, would you be eligible for treatment under the NHS if you caught something?

No idea but I'm sure Nighty will still be keeping this thread alive when hell freezes over

oldbackrow wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Fucking hell.

If you are in hell and doing that, would you be eligible for treatment under the NHS if you caught something?

Only if you've paid your taxes and contributed to this country otherwise you have no rights or benifets. Its true, ask Nighty

WaspInWales wrote:

oldbackrow wrote:If you are in hell and doing that, would you be eligible for treatment under the NHS if you caught something?

No idea but I'm sure Nighty will still be keeping this thread alive when hell freezes over

Yes or no! Yes or no!Yes or no! Yes or no!Yes or no! Yes or no!Yes or no! Yes or no!Yes or no! Yes or no!

Nightynight wrote:I wasn't asking you anyway

I don't remember anyone asking your opinion on this matter, but thanks for sharing anyway.

Ross. S wrote:

oldbackrow wrote:

WaspInWales wrote:Fucking hell.

If you are in hell and doing that, would you be eligible for treatment under the NHS if you caught something?

Only if you've paid your taxes and contributed to this country otherwise you have no rights or benifets. Its true, ask Nighty

But surely I'll be even more able to avoid paying tax in hell? After all isn't that where all the accounts, politicians and lawyers go?