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

[Guest]

Tomás Ó hÉilidhe wrote:

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.

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


What wont happen again?

That you vent your racism here?

Or that you abandon your racist views?

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.

well put (all of it). I don't think Tomas O hElidhe has quite grasped
this defininition of racism. It is certainly prejudice in a quite
naked form.

By the way, you were never attacked by gypsies,

how do you know he was never attacked by gypsies?

and they are peaceful people.

what all of them? Isn't this reverse racism. Just as no cultural
sub-group is all bad nor is any one all good. We all put our
trouses on one leg at a time. We are all human.

They do not start extermination programs like germans did with
gypsies or english did with blacks,

I'm sorry?

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>

and I don't

 

[Guest]

I've got news for you (just in case you're not already intimately
familiar with this fact): The whole "Christianity" thing is one big scam.

Although I haven't been to any of the regulars's websites (and certainly
wouldn't waste the time or risk the viruses), it certainly came as no
surprise to learn, as I did a year or so ago, that most of them *were
Christian loonies.

for the record I am not a Christian loony. If indeed I qualify
as "a regualar" in your eyes.

 It fits in so well with their generali nastiness and
their "politically correct" version of C.  Note that the whole point of
Christianity is exactly that of C - to appear helpful and kind, while
not ever actually helping anyone.

people like you make me a shamed to be a meta-agnostic

 

[Guest]

<snip>



I do not like to tease people about their religion,

so don't

but I feel I must
bring a point up. Many people fall victim to a religion, I for one
fell victim to Catholicism having being raised in Ireland, but
thankfully it wasn't force on me hard enough to have a lasting
detrimental effect. I do not know Mr Heathfield's upbringing, I do not
blame him for being Christian, nor do I hold him accountable for his
religious beliefs.

he's an adult, so yes you can hold him responsible for his beliefs.

Mr Heathfield claims to be a devout Christian, and
the religion of Christianity has a thing called "Confession". What
"Confession" means is that you can commit a "sin" and then later
assuage yourself of any guilt by "confessing the sin".

I don't think confession is a doctrine used by all forms
of Christianity. I think it mainly applies to Catholisism.

 > People are, first and foremost, people, not mere group members. We
should


OK so then you think there's such a thing as a good Nazi.

I myself don't believe that there are good Nazis. In order for such a
"good Nazi" to be truly good, they would have to separate from Nazism.

Schindler's List?

 

[James Kuyper]

for the record I am not a Christian loony. If indeed I qualify
as "a regualar" in your eyes.

I suspect he'd classify me as a regular too, and I'm very publicly on
record as an atheist.

I'm an atheist because I disagree with Believers' beliefs about the
objective aspect of the nature of the universe, and also some of the
behavior they engage in that would make sense only if those beliefs were
actually justified by the available evidence. However, I've known a
great many Christians (it's hard not to, while living in a Christian
dominated country), and from what I've seen many people have found in
Christianity an excuse to behave in the sincerely kind and helpful way
that they would have behaved in anyway without that religious belief
justify that behavior.

The only thing that all Christians have in common is the importance they
attach to teachings that they ascribe to Christ. They don't all ascribe
the same teachings to Christ, and they don't agree on Christ's nature.
They vary a great deal in the degree to which they know about, care
about, and obey the details of those teachings. To make any more
sweeping generalizations about them than that is to exhibit the same
kind of bigotry as Tomás Ó hÉilidhe exhibited when he made similarly
sweeping generalizations about all Roma Gypsies based (apparantly) upon
a small number of bad personal experiences with them.

....
That's a nonsense motive to attribute to members of either group. If you
don't help them, then you're not providing anything they need you for,
anyway.

 

[Tomás Ó hÉilidhe]

A lot has been said, a lot of issues have been addressed, and I would
like to thank everyone who took part in the discussion.

To close, I would like to give insight into the actual real-life
consequences of my prejudices. The purpose of offering this insight is
not to exonerate myself, not to receive comments or judgment, but
simply to give people insight into my own mind so that they may form
their own opinion of me. Rather than abide by Mr Heathfield's advice
of "ignoring him because he's racist", make your own choice.

I have no doubt that the insight I'm about to give will definitely
qualify as "racism" by some people's definitions, so there's no need
to reply with "You're racist". Nor is there any need to comment on the
validity of my definition of "racist". I'm already aware that people
here disagree with me on these issues. Furthermore, the very existence
of this particular thread confirms that these people's feelings have
already been made adequately known, so I ask that you please refrain
from adding further noise to the group.

So here comes the insight:

In my original post from 6 months ago, I expressed negative views
toward Roma gypsies. Today, I still hold these negative views. I will
spare you the exact details of these views on this occasion, but I
will explain the actual real-life consequences of my prejudice. After
all, the real-life consequences are all that matter. A person may
think whatever they want in the comfort of their own mind, but things
only become a problem if the "bad thoughts" actually result in "bad
stuff happening". An example of "bad stuff happening" would be someone
being turned down for a job because of their skin colour.

So here's a hypothetical situation:
I'm shopkeeper, and I'm looking for a new shop assistant. I put
out an ad, and a few people reply to the ad by handing a CV into the
shop.

Now I'm going to give you two different hypothetical sub-situations.
Here's the first one:
* Let's say I'm out of the country for a week or two, so I'm not
around to interview the hopefuls. I get a phonecall from one of my
juniour shop assistants back home saying that the shop is bedlam and
that both my seniour shop assistants are out sick. I need another
person there straight away. I ask the juniour assistant to go into my
office and look at the CV's on my table. If there were two CV's on the
table, one for an Irish 19-year-old from an upper-class area, and one
for a Roma gypsie 18-year-old, (and considering that I'm on the spot
here and need to make a quick choice), I would choose against the Roma
gypsie. I would make this choice because I am of the belief that
there's a greater probability of having a problem with a random Roma
gypsie than there is of having a problem with a random Irishman from
an upperclass area. It is of course very unfortunate for all humanity
that I should make this discriminatory decision, but if I were on the
spot and had minimal information, then my past experiences would be
influential.

And here's another hypothetical sub-situation:
* My trip got canceled, so I'm still at the shop. I have 5 CV's on
my desk. I see a CV for a Roma gypsie among the pile. Given my past
negative experiences with Roma gypsies, I would be apprehensive from
the offset about hiring one. HOWEVER, and this is the important part,
I would never deprive anyone of the opportunity to prove themselves.
I /would/ in fact give the Roma gypsie an interview, and I would keep
an open mind. It is possible that the Roma gypsie could turn out to be
nothing like what I expected, and they could possibly end up being my
prime choice for the job.

I have prejudices, and they do come into play when making "quick
decisions", but I would never deprive a person of the opportunity to
prove themselves.

And here's another situation, this time a factual situation that
actually goes on in my life currently:
When I'm out in a bar in Laos, I leave my telephone on the table
when I go to the toilet. I feel that the probability of the phone
being stolen is so low that it is outweighed by the convenience of
being able to leave it on the table. However, when a person of a
"particular physical attribute" (here-after referred to as a PFA) is
present in the bar, I keep an eye on my phone and I don't leave it
down. The reason for this is that I feel there's a high probability of
the phone going for a walk, and I feel this probability greatly
outweighs the convenience of leaving it on the table. The reason I
believe that the person with this PFA might rob my phone is that in
all my time here in Laos, I've seen three phones stolen, and each time
the perpetrator had this PFA. This of course doesn't mean that
EVERYONE with this PFA goes around robbing phones. Quite the contrary,
I am currently friends with about 5 people here in Laos that have this
PFA, I go to the gym with them everyday and I go to a bar with them
occasionally, and I've no problem leaving my phone down on a table
when they're around.

My prejudices are a short-lived defense mechanism. They exist when I
first meet someone because I am apprehensive, but it doesn't take long
at all for me to form an opinion about them personally. I would not
give up my prejudices for all the marshmallows in the world because I
know they serve me well in life.

So do I consider myself to be racist? No, I don't. I have prejudices
which lead me to be apprehensive when I first meet someone, but I will
never let my prejudices get in the way of giving someone a chance.

And so exactly what do I consider to be racism? I would consider
someone to be racist if they were to let their racial prejudices get
in the way of giving someone a chance. As an example, the KKK will
never give a black man a chance; this is quite wrong, taboo, and it
leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

So there you go, that's me. If you believe me to be racist, then
that's fair enough you're entitled to your own opinion and I respect
that. However, what I ask is that you don't interrupt technical
discussions to badmouth me.

Thank you for listening, hopefully this discussion can be put to rest
if everyone is satisfied they have expressed themselves. If anyone has
anything to add, then by all means go ahead, but please don't add any
further noise.

 

[Guest]

In my original post from 6 months ago, I expressed negative views
toward Roma gypsies. Today, I still hold these negative views. I will
spare you the exact details of these views on this occasion, but I
will explain the actual real-life consequences of my prejudice. After
all, the real-life consequences are all that matter. A person may
think whatever they want in the comfort of their own mind, but things
only become a problem if the "bad thoughts" actually result in "bad
stuff happening". An example of "bad stuff happening" would be someone
being turned down for a job because of their skin colour.

<snip>

Another example of bad stuff happening is that a person who holds
such
views may post racist stuff to technical news groups. And if is left
unchallanged it may give some people the erroneous idea that such
views
are acceptable.

 

[Tomás Ó hÉilidhe]

Another example of bad stuff happening is that a person who holds
such
views may post racist stuff to technical news groups.

What I did was wrong, I admit that it was wrong, and I apologise. I'll
say it again: Sorry.

And if is left
unchallanged it may give some people the erroneous idea that such
views
are acceptable.

I've two points to make:

1: It was challenged at the time, which isn't much of a surprise at
all because what I posted was entirely inappropriate. What I take
issue with is having it brought up 6 months later in a technical
discussion where it bears no relevance.

2: Is there some sort of hive mind that decides "what is acceptable"?
Are we drones? I myself decide what is acceptable. I don't let my
people decide, I don't let my boss decide, I don't let my religion
decide, and I don't let my friends decide. /I/ decide.

 

[Bartc]

A lot has been said, a lot of issues have been addressed, and I would
like to thank everyone who took part in the discussion.

To close, I would like to give insight into the actual real-life

Just as the thread was dying, you have to resurrect it with another
controversial 100-line post.

The message you should have learned originally was to keep these views,
justified or not, private.

 

[Joachim Schmitz]

Tomás Ó hÉilidhe said:

A lot has been said,

Some would say that too much has been said - and others would say
that not enough has been said.

[...] I ask that you please refrain from adding further noise
to the group.

Your article invites many possible replies, but I'll confine myself
to replying to just one of the issues raised.

So here's a hypothetical situation:
I'm shopkeeper, and I'm looking for a new shop assistant. I
put
out an ad, and a few people reply to the ad by handing a CV into
the shop.

[...] I need
another person there straight away. I ask the juniour assistant to
go into my office and look at the CV's on my table. If there were
two CV's on the table, one for an Irish 19-year-old from an
upper-class area, and one for a Roma gypsie 18-year-old, (and
considering that I'm on the spot here and need to make a quick
choice), I would choose against the Roma gypsie.

If a UK shopkeeper did this, he (or she) could expect to be
prosecuted in fairly short order for race discrimination - and
rightly so.

In fact this would be the case all over the EU, not just in the UK.

Bye, Jojo

 

[soscpd]

Hello c.l.c

Richard Heathfield wrote:
Tomás Ó hÉilidhe wrote:

You guys (not restrict to the names above) are kidding, right?




Rafael

P.S. Anything like "Of course!!! Was you thinking that all that is for
real?" will be very much welcome.

 

[soscpd]

table, one for an Irish 19-year-old from an upper-class area, and one
for a Roma gypsie 18-year-old, (and considering that I'm on the spot

my desk. I see a CV for a Roma gypsie among the pile.

being able to leave it on the table. However, when a person of a
"particular physical attribute" (here-after referred to as a PFA) is
present in the bar,

Tomás

I can't take my time to read your entire thread, but with this 3
little pieces (no matter the context), Im sure you can't dig any
deeper. You better shut up. Turn off your computer, smash the monitor
on the floor (or was the window?) and go get some sleep. No more then
50, no less then 49 (years).

You will be just fine when you wake.

If you don't, I don't care.

Richard

I think you better don't feed the.... mmm... "thing" (troll is a
praise) any more.

As you can see, nothing good can just pop out. Is worth the price?


Rafael

 

[Tomás Ó hÉilidhe]

It's time to give it a rest.  Suffice it to say that you simply can't
explain your way out of this situation; you can only make things worse by
continuing.

Actually Anthony I'm quite happy with how this discussion panned
out, and I say that honestly. My goal isn't to "explain my wait out"
of anything, because if that were my goal I could simply apologise for
my original words from 6 months ago and say that what I said was
wrong.


I prefer to live an honest life, even it's politically incorrect.
Too many people nowadays, politicians in particular, are dishonest in
public fora, they censor what they say because they're afraid of the
reaction. Of course many people on this forum have openly condemned my
mindset, but in private company you find it's a very small minority
that maintain the same politically correct stance. And I seriously
cast derision on the good judgment of people who even in private
company will maintain the same politically correct stance (you might
have noticed that I didn't receive a single response to any of the
examples I gave of racism being productive, e.g. Would you tell your
kids in Cambodia to stay away from diamond sellers or would you prefer
to take the risk of your child being brought home to you in a box?). I
wouldn't want such people in charge of my country's security, or for
them to be in a position of making any important rational decisions,
reason being that their inherent human judgment is clouded by
aspiration to a pipe dream.

 

[Antoninus Twink]

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.

Heathfield is a hypocrite. A Pharisee, if you will. He does not practise
what he preaches. Just like a lot of the most vocal "Christians".

He is a nasty little bully who clearly tries to make up for his own
inadequacies but carrying out ugly character assassinations, as you say.

If this group were not completely dysfunctional as a society, Heathfield
would be rightly ostracized for his antisocial behavior. As it is, he is
idolized and imitated by a whole host of ass-lickers, fanboys and
regular wannabes. It's sad, really.

 

[Antoninus Twink]

I've known people to hold some very odd opinions (eg. young earth
creationism) whilst being technically competant.

In fact, it's quite likely that Heathfield himself holds those opinions,
though I'm not sure I'd describe him as "technically competent".

 

[Kenny McCormack]

Actually Anthony I'm quite happy with how this discussion panned
out, and I say that honestly. My goal isn't to "explain my wait out"
of anything, because if that were my goal I could simply apologise for
my original words from 6 months ago and say that what I said was
wrong.

All of what you say is, of course, entirely correct and reasonable.
And nobody (in the real world) seriously thinks otherwise. The nutjobs
on CLC, though, may in fact seriously think otherwise.

But Anthony is also right in that there is a definite online ethic which
is distinct from the real world. It is also, as you note, akin to what
politicians say and what public discourse has become. But it is not
what people really, truly believe in their heart of hearts (again, CLC
nutjobs possibly excluded). As much as it pains me to say this, he is
right in that anything you say will just make it worse, as the nutjobs
just won't let it be.

I noticed this long ago - that if they can make the label "racist" stick
- that is, if they can make the mud stick - you're doomed. There's no
getting away from it. It is poisonous mud, that can't be washed away.
Luckily, this mud only has relevance in the context of online fora.
Don't let that fact escape your mind.

Finally, let me note that this whole accusation of "racism" is bunkum
from the word go (and is here and in every other newsgroup where they
use it - as I say, it is fatally poisonous mud and a very effective
weapon). The reason it is bunkum is that there is no such thing as
race! I feel I should repeat that. There is no such thing as race!
In a newsgroup that is obsessive about nitpicky accuracy (and this one
certainly qualifies), you'd think someone would have noticed this by
now. To make this clear, what I am saying is that the concept of race
has no scientific standing anymore. Look it up in any scientific
source. This was one of the main things I learned in an Anthropology
class many, many years ago. Again, there is no scientific concept of
race. And in this newsgroup, above any others, that fact ought to reign
supreme.

You will find that they are using "race" as a catchall for many things,
including your "PFA". BTW, shouldn't that be "PPA"?

 

[CBFalconer]

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:
.... snip ...

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.

He pointed out that you had failed to apologize for your racial
rant. You have now done so, so there is some possibility of having
some plonks removed.

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...

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.

I have posted the following many times. I guess you were not
paying attention.

Some free news servers. I use motzarella and gmane.
<http://www.teranews.com> (1 time charge) (free)
<http://news.aioe.org> (free)
<http://dotsrc.org> (free)
<http://www.x-privat.org/international.php> (free)
<http://motzarella.org/?language=en> (free)
<http://dotsrc.org/usenet/>(via://dotsrc.org/usenet/)(free)
<http://gmane.org/> (mail-lists via news) (free)
<http://www.newsfeeds.com/signup.htm> (pay)
<http://www.individual.net/ (low pay)

 

[Tomás Ó hÉilidhe]

You mean you meant them seriously? Good grief.

May I solicit a serious response from you on this?

It is already common practice amongst parents to advise their
children not to talk to strangers.

That's a horrible generalisation. Are people really that nasty where
you come from? Over here in Laos kids talk to strangers all the time.

Where the peril is too great for
children to be allowed out unsupervised, the adult should supervise
them. Duh. No racism is required, however.

That really paints the picture of a nasty environment where people
make horrible generalisations about people. I don't blame you for this
though Mr Heathfield, I can understand why you'd let a generalisation
defend your children.

Treating people decently is not a pipe dream. It *can* be done. I
suggest you try it.

I did try it. As I mentioned in my post from 6 months back, I once
helped a Roma gypsie out in reading a German document aloud for him.
It wasn't until I got home that I realised the whole "read a foreign
language" thing is a con to direct one's concentration away from
minding one's belongings.

And then there was the time I gave a lift to a stranger in Dublin. I
asked him for directions to somewhere, and he said "yeah I know where
that is, I'm actually heading there now", so I let him into my car. He
led me about 5 miles in the wrong direction, then got out and walked
into a pub.

See when somebody has a few experiences like this in life, they
develop a thing called "cop on". People learn from their experiences.
For instance, I don't let strangers into my car anymore, and when my
younger brother started driving I also told him not to let strangers
into his car no matter if they said that they're heading to the same
place. And you can bet I won't help a Roma gypsie read a page of
German again unless I've got zipped pockets that make a nice loud zip
noise when you unzip them.

I have an observation to make. Allow me to extend your position. The
stance you maintain indicates to me that you deny the existence of
probability among human distributions. If you pick an American at
random, and a Japanese at random, it's highly probable that the
Japanese person will have a healthier diet. If you pick an Inuit at
random, and a Kenyan at random, it's highly probable that the Kenyan
will be a better runner. If you pick a Mormon at random, and an
Irishman at random, it's highly probably that the Irishman will be the
heavier drinker (oh wait is this one incorrect because the attribute
is controversial?).

You can do these comparisons between all sorts of people, pick a man
at random and a woman at random and it's highly probable that the man
will be taller. Pick a literate man at random and an illiterate man at
random and it's highly probable that the literate man is more
knowledgeable.

Denying the existence of probability among human distributions is
absolutely ludicrous, and in all seriousness it makes me wonder if
you're right in the head. I retract my statement at the beginning of
this thread which said that you were intelligent.

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...

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.

How do you know? There haven't been any real Nazis around for over
sixty years. I had an aunt who was a Nazi in prewar Austria. I
met her after the war, and she was a good person. However she had
some of your prejudices against groups of peoples. I also had an
uncle, who did things to assist Jews when he was in the German army
in Poland and Denmark. He ended up a POW in Russia, and wasn't
freed until about 1955!! He was an especially nice person.

I knew other ex-German army/paratrooper/whatevers in Montreal after
the war. All were quite nice and natural.

Just to maintain the balance, I had other relatives in the US,
British, and Canadian armed forces. My mother translated and
censored German POW letters written in Canada.

I hope you have learned something.

 

[CBFalconer]

Mr Heathfield, you claim that a Usenet discussion cannot be
interrupted. Here's a hypothetical:

My name's Bobby and I come along to read comp.lang.c. I see the
thread entitled "executable file..." and I read through the thread.
I see the comment by Tomás that says "So it works on some systems
but not all", and then I see Ian's comment that says "Who said
what?", ...

And you have obviously failed to recognize that Mr Collins was
objecting to the casual omission of attribution and quotations,
both of which are essential to reasonable Usenet communications,
and are standard procedures.