[OFF-TOPIC] Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Tomás Ó hÉilidhe, Dec 13, 2008.

  1. ---------- OFF-TOPIC ----------

    This is an off-topic post for "comp.lang.c" and I would like to
    apologise to the readers for inflicting this post on the group. Nobody
    here is obligated to read this post or to respond to it.

    I would like to respond to Mr Richard Heathfield's public accusations
    of racism against me on this newsgroup, and also to his unrelenting
    attempts at character-assassination on this newsgroup. His most recent
    attempt took place on December 13th 2008 in the thread entitled
    "exectuable file runs on some computers, not all". His post can be
    viewed here:

    http://groups.google.ie/group/comp.lang.c/msg/639389cb4eed0c46

    From reading Mr Heathfield's posts, one would get the impression that
    he considers himself to be a moral, ethical, polite, well-educated,
    intelligent, knowledgeable and professional man. Also he considers
    himself to be a devout Christian, a religion emphasizing kindness and
    compassion toward fellow people. When conducting himself in an online
    discussion, Mr Heathfield exhaults himself to a moral highground based
    on these premises. What flies in the face of this is his malicious
    behaviour of attempting to character-assassinate people. On December
    13th 2008, he went to the bother of verbatim quoting a post of mine
    from many months ago; he sat at his computer and did a search to find
    that post of mine, and then replicated that post here in an attempt to
    character-assassinate me. It is clear that his actions took effort and
    were driven by a sadistic impulse. I wouldn't be surprised if he had
    many posts by many different people saved to his hard disk and
    archived for use in future character-assassination endeavors.

    Mr Heathfield presently has me in his killfile for what he has
    publicly cited on this newsgroup as "racism". Before I begin, I would
    like to clarify the term "racism". The term "racism" is quite
    ambiguous nowadays because it is used by so many different socio-
    economic classes in so many different contexts. The word is used by
    intellectual and non-intellectual people alike. For instance, you have
    the "racism" of idiots like the Ku Klux Klan who hate black people
    simply because they're black and no other reason (this particular kind
    of "racism" is considered taboo by many people in the world including
    myself). Then you have the "racism" of people such as those who have
    had many negative experiences with people of a given race in a given
    area, and have learned to avoid those people in that area. These two
    kinds of "racism" are so far separated from each other than I no
    longer use the term "racism" at all because it is so ambiguous. There
    was a time not too long ago that I would consider myself "racist", in
    fact I even publicly declared myself to be "racist against Roma
    gypsies" on this very newsgroup, but since then I have put more
    thought into the term and have changed my opinion.

    Some months ago, I composed an off-topic rant of a post on this
    newsgroup which mentioned Roma gypsies. I was aggravated at the time,
    and I apologise for using this newsgroup as a vent. I have no excuse
    for my actions, I'm sorry and it won't happen again.

    In my original off-topic rant of a post that mentioned Roma gypsies, I
    heaped negative criticism on Roma gypsies, criticism which stemmed
    from my own personal direct observations and experiences with them. I
    did not criticise these people because of their race or ancestry, but
    rather because of their unsavoury actions which I described in detail.
    If I had had pleasant observations and experiences with these people,
    I would not have given negative criticism. The fact that Roma gypsies
    belong to a different "race" than me is purely coincidental, and I
    just as easily criticise people of my own race (for instance I have
    many times criticised the people who lived within a mile of me in
    Ireland who spent their weekend nights joyriding cars they robbed from
    their own housing estate).

    I am originally from the country of Ireland in Western Europe.
    Currently I am living in the country of Laos in Southeast Asia. I have
    experienced two totally different cultures, with totally different
    races of people and different spoken languages. If I were racist then
    I would have a difficult time settling into a foreign culture,
    adopting foreign customs and learning a foreign language. Thankfully
    though I am thriving here and having the best days of my life.

    Regarding the criticism I made against Roma gypsies, well I forfeit
    this opportunity to retract it. The criticism I gave was truthful,
    unexaggerated and based upon my own personal observations and
    experiences with these people. In my life I will continue to criticise
    groups of people who act in ways unbecoming a human, regardless of
    race, hairstyle, spoken accent, or any identifiable feature.

    To be blunt, just because a people is of a different race than you,
    that doesn't mean they're out of bounds for criticism. I would even go
    on to criticise the people who attempt to condone the actions of other
    peoples simply because those peoples are of a different race and
    should somehow receive preferential treatment which exempts them from
    criticism. This preferential treatment is "racism".

    Mr Heathfield is an intelligent, well-educated, knowledgeable man, and
    he is very apt at using professionalism to disguise his sadistic
    intentions. He has trolled thi newsgroup of comp.lang.c for many
    years, and for the most part his trolling has gone unobserved. I would
    like to think in a perfect world that no amount of expertise or
    knowledge should excuse malicious and hostile behaviour.

    Thank you for your attention.

    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe
    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe, Dec 13, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    I put "[OFF-TOPIC]" in the title of this thread but unfortunately
    Google Groups appears to have removed it before posting. My apologises
    to anyone that filters by thread title.

    By the way does any know a good free news server I can use? I began
    using Google Groups because I lost access to my news server when I
    changed Internet Service Provider.
    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe, Dec 13, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

    Guest

    Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    On Dec 13, 3:15 pm, Tomás Ó hÉilidhe <> wrote:
    > I put "[OFF-TOPIC]" in the title of this thread but unfortunately
    > Google Groups appears to have removed it before posting. My apologises
    > to anyone that filters by thread title.


    Your posts are always borderline off-topic (and sometimes entirely off-
    topic) and your behavior is not proper. I'd say you're a troll.

    > By the way does any know a good free news server I can use? I began
    > using Google Groups because I lost access to my news server when I
    > changed Internet Service Provider.


    Off-topic.
    , Dec 13, 2008
    #3
  4. Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

    Bartc Guest

    Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    "Richard Heathfield" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > said:
    >
    >> On Dec 13, 3:15 pm, Tomás Ó hÉilidhe <> wrote:
    >>> I put "[OFF-TOPIC]" in the title of this thread but unfortunately
    >>> Google Groups appears to have removed it before posting. My apologises
    >>> to anyone that filters by thread title.

    >>
    >> Your posts are always borderline off-topic (and sometimes entirely off-
    >> topic) and your behavior is not proper. I'd say you're a troll.

    >
    > He may or may not be a troll. It's often hard to tell. But his choice of
    > subject line is dreadful. I bear him no animosity whatsoever. I don't bear
    > animosity towards any racist. But there is a difference between not
    > bearing animosity towards someone on the one hand, and remaining silent
    > when they exhibit discriminatory attitudes towards particular ethnic
    > groups. Niemoller, Burke (attrib), and all that.


    A technical discussion should be above the personal views of the
    participants in unrelated areas.

    Maybe it's time to just forget it instead of forever bringing it up again.

    > When we make the mistake of basing our assessment of a person not on that
    > person's actions, but upon characteristics over which the person has no
    > control (e.g. ethnicity, gender, whatever), we tread a very dangerous path
    > indeed. People are, first and foremost, individuals rather than mere group
    > members, and they should be treated as such.


    Who hasn't ever made such an assessment?


    --
    Bartc
    Bartc, Dec 13, 2008
    #4
  5. Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    In article <>,
    <> babbled on incoherently as always:
    >On Dec 13, 3:15 pm, Tomás Ó hÉilidhe <> wrote:
    >> I put "[OFF-TOPIC]" in the title of this thread but unfortunately
    >> Google Groups appears to have removed it before posting. My apologises
    >> to anyone that filters by thread title.

    >
    >Your posts are always borderline off-topic (and sometimes entirely off-
    >topic) and your behavior is not proper. I'd say you're a troll.
    >
    >> By the way does any know a good free news server I can use? I began
    >> using Google Groups because I lost access to my news server when I
    >> changed Internet Service Provider.

    >
    >Off-topic.


    Man, do you need to get a life!
    Kenny McCormack, Dec 13, 2008
    #5
  6. Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

    Guest

    Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    On Dec 13, 4:23 pm, "Bartc" <> wrote:
    > "Richard Heathfield" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    >
    >
    >
    > > said:

    >
    > >> On Dec 13, 3:15 pm, Tomás Ó hÉilidhe <> wrote:
    > >>> I put "[OFF-TOPIC]" in the title of this thread but unfortunately
    > >>> Google Groups appears to have removed it before posting. My apologises
    > >>> to anyone that filters by thread title.

    >
    > >> Your posts are always borderline off-topic (and sometimes entirely off-
    > >> topic) and your behavior is not proper. I'd say you're a troll.

    >
    > > He may or may not be a troll. It's often hard to tell. But his choice of
    > > subject line is dreadful. I bear him no animosity whatsoever. I don't bear
    > > animosity towards any racist. But there is a difference between not
    > > bearing animosity towards someone on the one hand, and remaining silent
    > > when they exhibit discriminatory attitudes towards particular ethnic
    > > groups. Niemoller, Burke (attrib), and all that.

    >
    > A technical discussion should be above the personal views of the
    > participants in unrelated areas.


    A technical discussion should be above all the personal views of the
    participants, related or not.

    > Maybe it's time to just forget it instead of forever bringing it up again..
    >
    > > When we make the mistake of basing our assessment of a person not on that
    > > person's actions, but upon characteristics over which the person has no
    > > control (e.g. ethnicity, gender, whatever), we tread a very dangerous path
    > > indeed. People are, first and foremost, individuals rather than mere group
    > > members, and they should be treated as such.

    >
    > Who hasn't ever made such an assessment?


    So you justify doing something wrong just because everyone has at
    least once in their life done something wrong?
    , Dec 13, 2008
    #6
  7. Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    On Dec 13, 9:12 pm, Richard Heathfield <> wrote:

    > I bear him no animosity whatsoever. I don't bear
    > animosity towards any racist. But there is a difference between not
    > bearing animosity towards someone on the one hand, and remaining silent
    > when they exhibit discriminatory attitudes towards particular ethnic
    > groups.



    Mr Heathfield is lying about his motives here. Allow me to explain.
    The discussion went as follows:

    Myself:

    "So you're saying it works on some
    Windows XP machines but not on all."

    Ian Collins:

    "Who said what?"

    Mr Heathfield:

    "Tomas O hEilidhe said (only about six months ago,
    in this very newsgroup) But then there's one
    immigrant people..."

    As you can see, I did not "exhibit discriminatory attitudes towards
    particular ethnic groups" as Mr Heathfield alleges. Mr Heathfield
    pounced on the opportunity to character-assassinate me for his own
    sadistic ends. There was no other goal in mind, he is full of venom.


    > When we make the mistake of basing our assessment of a person not on that
    > person's actions, but upon characteristics over which the person has no
    > control (e.g. ethnicity, gender, whatever), we tread a very dangerous path
    > indeed.



    A foolish man living a pipe dream. In real life, stereotypes and
    prejudice are the things that keep you alive. When I lived in Ireland,
    there were certain groups of people that I avoided because I knew that
    if I mixed with them, they would rob me and assault me. Here in Laos,
    there is a certain group of people that I avoid because I would be
    dead within a day or two if I were to mix with them (regardless of
    whether I were to pay them in full for the diamonds they're selling).

    If you tell a child to have no prejudice or to not stereotype people,
    then you're doing a very foolish thing indeed. If you think upholding
    the virtues of humanity is more important then your child's life, then
    you're best off sacrificing the child at birth because the be-all and
    end-all of life is that you have to step in shit to get through it.


    > People are, first and foremost, individuals rather than mere group
    > members, and they should be treated as such.



    Incorrect. The groups you belong to say a lot about who you are. As a
    man once said, "Show me your friends and I'll tell you who you are".

    Here's an extreme example:
    Is there a such thing as a good Nazi? No there's not. In order for
    a Nazi to be good, they have to distance themselves from Nazism and
    claim to not be a Nazi. They have to openly say that they condemn
    Nazism and that they don't want to be considered a Nazi.

    Another thing, don't think that a person is tied to their race or to
    the colour of their skin. Here in Laos, if you're white and don't want
    to be categorised as a "Westerner", then it's a simple as changing
    your clothes. It also helps a lot if you speak the local language.
    When I'm up a the Friendship Bridge between Laos and Thailand, taxi
    drivers come over to harass me but they turn around straight away when
    I reply to them in Lao telling them I don't want a taxi and I don't
    want drugs.

    If someone wears the clothes of a certain group, maintains the same
    poor hygiene as members of that group, wears the same gold teeth as
    members of that group, then I'll categorise them as "being a member of
    that group". If that person doesn't want to be categorised as a member
    of that particular group, they can remove their gold teeth, take a
    bath, and change their clothes. By Christ if someone were to approach
    me with such sentiment then I'd gladly buy them clothes and let them
    use my shower.
    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe, Dec 13, 2008
    #7
  8. Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    On Dec 13, 9:53 pm, Richard Heathfield <> wrote:

    > Nor is anyone here under any obligation to provide technical
    > support to those whose actions promote discrimination against ethnic
    > minorities.



    And here is Mr Heathfield with a sweeping generalisation of his own:
    Because I criticised one group which just happened to be an ethnic
    minority, that of course means that I must promote discrimination
    against all ethnic minorities.

    There are some absolutely wonderful ethnic minorities in this world
    who have warmer hearts than a Westerner will ever experience.



    > This is a classic Usenet argument (because Usenauts are easily bored), but
    > it is deeply flawed. It is based on the assumption that problems will
    > vanish if we cease to discuss them or care about them. Nothing could be
    > further from the truth.




    Of course instead, one should perform regular character-
    assassinations. I have yet to hear Mr Heathfield explain his goal in
    launching the unprovoked character-assassination earlier today.



    > This is the "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" argument, but
    > it is misapplied here. Nobody is stoning Mr O hEilidhe.




    Are you sure about that? The unprovoked attack you launched earlier
    today would suggest otherwise:

    http://groups.google.ie/group/comp.lang.c/msg/639389cb4eed0c46



    > But to answer your question anyway, yes, no doubt we all make such sweeping
    > generalisations from time to time. What, then, is the proper course for
    > those who witness this? To remain silent? We know where that leads.




    I addressed this issue else-thread. If you don't want to be
    categorised as a member of a particular group, then don't advertise
    yourself as a member of that group. Change your clothes. Remove your
    gold teeth. Take a bath.
    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe, Dec 13, 2008
    #8
  9. Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

    srikar2097 Guest

    Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    take it easy dude!! There is no reason to get so bent up...

    Even if anyone says somethings you ARE what you BELIEVE...
    srikar2097, Dec 13, 2008
    #9
  10. Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe <> writes:
    > On Dec 13, 9:53 pm, Richard Heathfield <> wrote:
    >> Nor is anyone here under any obligation to provide technical
    >> support to those whose actions promote discrimination against ethnic
    >> minorities.

    >
    > And here is Mr Heathfield with a sweeping generalisation of his own:
    > Because I criticised one group which just happened to be an ethnic
    > minority, that of course means that I must promote discrimination
    > against all ethnic minorities.

    [...]

    Nobody has accused you of promoting discrimination against all ethnic
    minorities. You have repeatedly and unapologetically promoted
    discrimination against one ethnic minority, and that is quite bad
    enough. I don't suggest that you shouldn't be allowed to post here,
    or even that others shouldn't respond to you, but I personally choose
    not to help you here, simply because you are a racist.

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    Nokia
    "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
    Keith Thompson, Dec 13, 2008
    #10
  11. Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe <> writes:
    > I put "[OFF-TOPIC]" in the title of this thread but unfortunately
    > Google Groups appears to have removed it before posting. My apologises
    > to anyone that filters by thread title.


    The "[OFF-TOPIC]" did appear in the original post; it didn't appear in
    the followup.

    > By the way does any know a good free news server I can use? I began
    > using Google Groups because I lost access to my news server when I
    > changed Internet Service Provider.


    Yes, I do. I'll tell you more if you promise not to discuss "Roma
    gypsies" in this newsgroup in the future, regardless of what you feel
    to be any provocation. I don't expect you to change your mind, and
    I'm not asking you not to discuss the topic elsewhere, just here.

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    Nokia
    "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
    Keith Thompson, Dec 13, 2008
    #11
  12. Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

    Bartc Guest

    Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    "Mark McIntyre" <> wrote in message
    news:QIS0l.14738$1.easynews.com...
    > Bartc wrote:
    >>
    >> "Richard Heathfield" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> said:
    >>>
    >>> there is a difference between not
    >>> bearing animosity towards someone on the one hand, and remaining silent
    >>> when they exhibit discriminatory attitudes towards particular ethnic
    >>> groups. Niemoller, Burke (attrib), and all that.

    >>
    >> A technical discussion should be above the personal views of the
    >> participants in unrelated areas.

    >
    > Mhm.
    >
    >> Maybe it's time to just forget it instead of forever bringing it up
    >> again.

    >
    > Uh, Richard wasn't the one bringing it up.


    Uh, yes he did, in a post today (13-Dec-08) and in another on 13-Nov-08.

    >
    > And as well as the two above references, I'd quote Santayana at you.
    >
    >>> When we make the mistake of basing our assessment of a person not on
    >>> that
    >>> person's actions, but upon characteristics over which the person has no
    >>> control (e.g. ethnicity, gender, whatever), we tread a very dangerous
    >>> path
    >>> indeed. People are, first and foremost, individuals rather than mere
    >>> group
    >>> members, and they should be treated as such.

    >>
    >> Who hasn't ever made such an assessment?

    >
    > Does that make it ok?


    No, but the OP was castigated at the time and that should have been the end
    of it.

    --
    Bartc
    Bartc, Dec 13, 2008
    #12
  13. Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

    jacob navia Guest

    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe wrote:
    > ---------- OFF-TOPIC ----------
    >
    >
    > I would like to respond to Mr Richard Heathfield's public accusations
    > of racism against me on this newsgroup, and also to his unrelenting
    > attempts at character-assassination on this newsgroup. His most recent
    > attempt took place on December 13th 2008 in the thread entitled
    > "exectuable file runs on some computers, not all". His post can be
    > viewed here:
    >
    > http://groups.google.ie/group/comp.lang.c/msg/639389cb4eed0c46


    In that post Heathfield cites you:

    "But then there's one immigrant people here that I truly despise: Roma
    gypsies. These people have no pride whatsoever. They really are rats. They
    come into my country illegally and create encapments at motorway
    junctions. They teach their children how to walk in a way that makes their
    bare leg look mangled, and then they send their kids to beg
    between cars on the road at a busy motorway junction. They have a
    mouth full of gold teeth (yes, actual gold, the rare chemical
    element), and they drive BMW cars (for those who don't know, BMW is a
    luxury car make), but yet they send their children to beg on the
    roads. They don't wash their bodies."

    end quote

    This is really too much. I am not a fan of Heathfield but you are
    clearly over the edge here man.

    >
    > Some months ago, I composed an off-topic rant of a post on this
    > newsgroup which mentioned Roma gypsies. I was aggravated at the time,
    > and I apologise for using this newsgroup as a vent. I have no excuse
    > for my actions, I'm sorry and it won't happen again.
    >


    What wont happen again?

    That you vent your racism here?

    Or that you abandon your racist views?


    > In my original off-topic rant of a post that mentioned Roma gypsies, I
    > heaped negative criticism on Roma gypsies, criticism which stemmed
    > from my own personal direct observations and experiences with them. I
    > did not criticise these people because of their race or ancestry, but
    > rather because of their unsavoury actions which I described in detail.
    > If I had had pleasant observations and experiences with these people,
    > I would not have given negative criticism. The fact that Roma gypsies
    > belong to a different "race" than me is purely coincidental, and I
    > just as easily criticise people of my own race (for instance I have
    > many times criticised the people who lived within a mile of me in
    > Ireland who spent their weekend nights joyriding cars they robbed from
    > their own housing estate).
    >


    Look, you are speaking about some gypsies. There are thieves that are
    gypsies, as there are thieves that are Irish. Let's not forget French
    thieves and U.S. thieves, like Mr Madoff, for instance, that stole 50
    billion.

    All people of the earth have thieves, people that do not wash themselves
    and people that are nasty in some ways. But what you fail to understand
    is that many gypsies have nothing to do with the people you describe.
    That there are wonderful artists that are gypsies, that there is a
    gypsie culture that exists since millenia.

    You should remember that Hitler shared your views and started an
    extermination program against gypsies that were killed by the
    hundreds of thousands.

    You spoke just hate against gypsies as a people. Not against *some*
    gypsies that robbed you. You generalize to ALL of them and that is
    racism.

    By the way, you were never attacked by gypsies, and they are peaceful
    people. They do not start extermination programs like germans did with
    gypsies or english did with blacks, or U.S. did with native american
    indians.

    I agree with the sentence of Heathfield:

    <quote>
    Knowing that he has said this (and never retracted it as far as I'm aware),
    I can't imagine why anyone would bother soliciting his opinions about
    anybody or anything, let alone advancing his career by answering his
    technical questions.
    <end quote>


    --
    jacob navia
    jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
    logiciels/informatique
    http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
    jacob navia, Dec 13, 2008
    #13
  14. Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    In article <>,
    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe <> wrote:
    ....
    >A foolish man living a pipe dream. In real life, stereotypes and
    >prejudice are the things that keep you alive. When I lived in Ireland,
    >there were certain groups of people that I avoided because I knew that
    >if I mixed with them, they would rob me and assault me. Here in Laos,
    >there is a certain group of people that I avoid because I would be
    >dead within a day or two if I were to mix with them (regardless of
    >whether I were to pay them in full for the diamonds they're selling).


    You are of course, 100% correct. Unfortunately, it (being honest about
    this sort of thing) just doesn't fly in the world of Usenet. As you've
    seen, in the world of online and Usenet, everyone has to pretend that
    things are other than they are.
    Kenny McCormack, Dec 13, 2008
    #14
  15. In article <494418a6$0$921$>,
    jacob navia <> wrote:
    >Tomás Ó hÉilidhe wrote:
    >> ---------- OFF-TOPIC ----------
    >>
    >>
    >> I would like to respond to Mr Richard Heathfield's public accusations
    >> of racism against me on this newsgroup, and also to his unrelenting
    >> attempts at character-assassination on this newsgroup. His most recent
    >> attempt took place on December 13th 2008 in the thread entitled
    >> "exectuable file runs on some computers, not all". His post can be
    >> viewed here:
    >>
    >> http://groups.google.ie/group/comp.lang.c/msg/639389cb4eed0c46

    ....
    >This is really too much. I am not a fan of Heathfield but you are
    >clearly over the edge here man.


    This is truly "stop the presses" material! Jacob and Heathfield taking
    the same side in an argument.

    Both are, unfortunately, wrong. Jacob is usually on the right side of
    things, but, alas, not here.
    Kenny McCormack, Dec 13, 2008
    #15
  16. Tomás Ó hÉilidhe wrote:
    > ---------- OFF-TOPIC ----------
    >
    > ...
    >
    > Some months ago, I composed an off-topic rant of a post on this
    > newsgroup which mentioned Roma gypsies. I was aggravated at the time,
    > and I apologise for using this newsgroup as a vent. I have no excuse
    > for my actions, I'm sorry and it won't happen again.
    >
    > In my original off-topic rant of a post that mentioned Roma gypsies, I
    > heaped negative criticism on Roma gypsies, criticism which stemmed
    > from my own personal direct observations and experiences with them. I
    > did not criticise these people because of their race or ancestry, but
    > rather because of their unsavoury actions which I described in detail.
    > If I had had pleasant observations and experiences with these people,
    > I would not have given negative criticism. The fact that Roma gypsies
    > belong to a different "race" than me is purely coincidental, and I
    > just as easily criticise people of my own race (for instance I have
    > many times criticised the people who lived within a mile of me in
    > Ireland who spent their weekend nights joyriding cars they robbed from
    > their own housing estate).


    How do you word your criticism of this group? Do you start with
    something like "There's one people here that I truly despise: the
    Irish"? If not, is it perhaps because you're talking about the behaviour
    of a particular group of people who happen to be Irish, but recognise
    that their behaviour is not representative of the entire Irish race? But
    for another race you assume that the behaviour of the few individuals
    you see is representative of a people distributed around the world?

    As long as it's factual, accurate and fair, there's no problem with
    criticism of a set of individuals. It's assigning that criticism to the
    entire race to which those individuals belong which is racist.
    J. J. Farrell, Dec 13, 2008
    #16
  17. Tomás Ó hÉilidhe

    Bartc Guest

    "Jack Klein" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 04:49:14 -0800 (PST), Tomás Ó hÉilidhe
    > <> wrote in comp.lang.c:


    >> I would like to respond to Mr Richard Heathfield's public accusations
    >> of racism against me on this newsgroup, and also to his unrelenting
    >> attempts at character-assassination on this newsgroup.

    >
    > Before I plonk you again, most likely forever this time, I'd like to
    > point out the falsehoods in your post.
    >
    > The word "racism" did not appear in Richard's post. So he did not
    > accuse you, in any way, shape, or form of racism. So your statement
    > to the contrary is either an error or a deliberate lie, an attempt to
    > distort his position.


    The word "racist" did appear here however:

    "Richard Heathfield" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I find it surprising that so many people who witnessed that discussion and
    > should therefore be aware of his racist attitude continue to enter into
    > further technical discussions with him despite the absence of any apology
    > or retraction on his behalf. (But then I find many things surprising.)


    (I don't know how to do proper message ids; this one was dated 13-Nov-08,
    subject:
    "Re: Cross-platform: Coloured text, Networking, Multithreading")


    --
    Bartc
    Bartc, Dec 14, 2008
    #17
  18. "Anthony Fremont" <> writes:

    > Jack Klein wrote:
    >> The word "racism" did not appear in Richard's post. So he did not
    >> accuse you, in any way, shape, or form of racism. So your statement
    >> to the contrary is either an error or a deliberate lie, an attempt to
    >> distort his position.

    >
    > That is simply not true.


    Yes it is.

    > He may not haved used that specific word in the
    > original post, but his intent was clear enough. At any rate, Richard
    > directly referred to him as a racist in this very thread.


    Subsequently, yes, but the post Jack Klein replied to was the first
    post in this thread. At that time Richard Heathfield's only comment
    (in another thread) was a direct, verbatim, quote of the OP's words
    and an invitation to readers to consider if they wanted to assist
    people who posted such remarks.

    > I'm not taking
    > sides, but you appear to be the one distorting things.


    What does it look like when you do take sides, then?

    --
    Ben.
    Ben Bacarisse, Dec 14, 2008
    #18
  19. Re: Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    On Dec 14, 1:18 am, Keith Thompson <> wrote:

    > Nobody has accused you of promoting discrimination against all ethnic
    > minorities.




    You're correct, Mr Heathfield didn't say "all", but he did use the
    plural "ethnic minorities".



    > You have repeatedly and unapologetically promoted
    > discrimination against one ethnic minority, and that is quite bad
    > enough.




    Why are you so focused on them being an ethnic minority? Why should
    that have anything to do with anything? If they were white, would it
    be OK to criticise their lifestyle?



    > I don't suggest that you shouldn't be allowed to post here,
    > or even that others shouldn't respond to you, but I personally choose
    > not to help you here, simply because you are a racist.




    Using the term "racist" implies that their race is in factor in my
    prejudice against them. If a white person were to do the things that
    these people do, I'd be just as disgusted and I'd give just as much
    criticism. Note, in my original original original post from way way
    back, I criticised the actions of these people and did not in any way
    criticise their creed, ancestry, gene pool...

    Your definition of "racism" is a cop-out.
    Tomás Ó hÉilidhe, Dec 14, 2008
    #19
  20. "Anthony Fremont" <> writes:

    > Ben Bacarisse wrote:
    >> "Anthony Fremont" <> writes:
    >>
    >>> Jack Klein wrote:
    >>>> The word "racism" did not appear in Richard's post. So he did not
    >>>> accuse you, in any way, shape, or form of racism. So your statement
    >>>> to the contrary is either an error or a deliberate lie, an attempt
    >>>> to distort his position.
    >>>
    >>> That is simply not true.

    >>
    >> Yes it is.
    >>
    >>> He may not haved used that specific word in the
    >>> original post, but his intent was clear enough. At any rate, Richard
    >>> directly referred to him as a racist in this very thread.

    >>
    >> Subsequently, yes, but the post Jack Klein replied to was the first
    >> post in this thread. At that time Richard Heathfield's only comment
    >> (in another thread) was a direct, verbatim, quote of the OP's words
    >> and an invitation to readers to consider if they wanted to assist
    >> people who posted such remarks.

    >
    > Richard had made the post I'm referring to at around 8:12am (local to me) in
    > this thread. Jack made his post after 5:00pm (local to me). I understand
    > USENET propagation is funky at best, but I'd say that Jack had plenty of
    > time to see Richard's post.


    Yes, I knew that was your point, but I disagree. I certainly saw all
    the subsequent remarks, but I would also have made the same comment
    (just as late) had Jack not already made it better.

    The OP cited a message that was little more that a straight quote of
    his own words as Richard's most recent attempt at character
    assassination. The OP offered no other evidence for his claim of
    character assassination and cited just the one message.

    I suspect the OP is simply embarrassed to see his words repeated but
    rather than fess up and retract them he chose to attack the quoter of
    his own words. He did include a rambling explanation that included an
    apology for using the group to vent his anger, but it stopped a long
    way short of retracting anything of substance. I can only conclude
    (until he corrects me) that he stands by what he said and what was
    subsequently quoted. If that is true, Richard's post is closer to
    character illumination than assassination.

    --
    Ben.
    Ben Bacarisse, Dec 14, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Anonymous

    Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    Anonymous, Dec 14, 2008, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    392
    CBFalconer
    Dec 21, 2008
  2. Borked Pseudo Mailed

    Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    Borked Pseudo Mailed, Dec 14, 2008, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    228
    Borked Pseudo Mailed
    Dec 14, 2008
  3. Anonymous

    Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    Anonymous, Dec 14, 2008, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    272
    Anonymous
    Dec 14, 2008
  4. George Orwell

    Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    George Orwell, Dec 14, 2008, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    253
    George Orwell
    Dec 14, 2008
  5. George Orwell

    Animosity on the part of Mr Richard Heathfield

    George Orwell, Dec 14, 2008, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    272
    Antoninus Twink
    Dec 15, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page