BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?

Subject: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 01:26 PM

We have been discussing on a music thread how common such signs are in UK today.
A non-resident accused me of lying that I had never seen one, even though two other Brits said the same.

Anyone else never seen one?
Who has?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 01:38 PM

I've never seen such a sign here in Norfolk, Keith. I should imagine it would be viewed as totally illegal and racist and be removed by the police. It's on a par with 'no blacks' or 'no Irish' etc. Surely there aren't such things displayed today?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 01:44 PM

Used to be fairly common on Pub Doors where where Tinkers were usual callers

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 01:49 PM

Thanks Eliza.
The East of England has more Travellers than any other part.
I hope you are not accused of lying too.
Leadfingers, how long since you have seen one?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,leeneia
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 01:57 PM

I've been to Great Britain twice and Ireland once, all times renting a car and driving around the countryside, and I've never seen a sign like that.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,sturgeon
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 02:03 PM

Not a pub, but an ice rink - http://www.joe.ie/news-politics/world-affairs/uk-ice-rink-slammed-for-placing-no-travellers-sign-0019545-1.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 02:23 PM

Used to be "NO HIPPIES" signs on cafe & shop doors in Glastonbury...

How that town has changed it's tune since the mid 70s..????

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 02:35 PM

I've never seen one in 38 years of living in Scotland.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 03:06 PM

This is unbelievable and sheer vindictive racism on the part of the OP – it has been moved from the 'No Irish Need Apply' thread in order to keep this blatent campaign against Traveller alive.
For the thirty years we worked with Travellers in London and the Home Counties, Birmingham and Bristol these signs were not only commonplace, but it was extremely rare to find a pub that would serve Travellers.
We went round London in the late 80s and early nineties with Travellers photographing them in order to assist the campaign for having them removed.
Our CD of Traveller songs 'From Puck To Appleby' has one of them in the notes – see Musical Traditions website which carries the full notes and photographs if you have any doubt
Despite the fact that it is illegal, many pubs still carry the signs, and others, while technically obeying the law and not displaying them, they refuse to serve Travellers
The last time we experienced it personally was in Bristol in 2005, which was the last time we recorded a Traveller
I would not have believed that anybody would go to such lengths to disprove one of the most well known facts regarding racism towards Travellers in Britain   
The OP's only argument against these facts is that he has never seen one so they don't exist.
The below addresses all carry references to the practice still going on – there are many, many more to choose from.
Take your pick
Jim Carroll

http://www.leicestershiretogether.org/gypsy_travellers_the_truth.pdf
Gypsies and Travellers can experience unequal treatment from the police. They cite stories of being arrested without due cause, unfairly barred from public venues, or repeatedly stopped and questioned. The CRE in 2004 pointed out that some forces are working to improve their equality strategies and practices, but in many areas there is a long way to go.
There are still 'No Travellers' signs in some pubs and shops, where Gypsies and Travellers face suspicion and extra scrutiny by security guards. Evidence also points to Gypsies and Travellers being prevented from entering cinemas and facing discrimination at fast food/restaurants and other retailers. In July 2008, Travellers also alleged that they were turned away from the Royal Windsor Horse Show.17 There can also be problems with getting taxis to drop off at sites. Gypsies and Travellers can and do meet outright public hostility and racism. Gypsies and Travellers are often the target of racist incidents, which can include verbal abuse, inappropriate jokes, damage to property, physical assault and even murder.18 Chants at football matches that equate players with long hair to living in caravans remain common to this day, whilst other stereotypically offensive and racist chanting has largely disappeared from UK football stadia. Leicestershire's Hate Incident Monitoring Project is a good source of information on hate incidents, including those of a racial nature.
http://www.gypsy-traveller.org/your-rights/law/harassment-and-discrimination/ Types of Discrimination

http://citynewyorkstatenisland.academia.edu/PeterKabachnik/Papers/870967/To_choose_fix_or_ignore_culture_The_cultural_politics_of_Gypsy_and_Traveler_mobility_in_England
http://www.c-s-p.org/flyers/9781847181275-sample.pdf
http://www.amazon.co.uk/No-Gypsies-Served-Miriam-Wakerly/dp/0955843219
http://www.travellerstimes.org.uk/downloads/TT39_27052009165255.pdf
http://www.gypsy-traveller.org/your-rights/law/harassment-and-discrimination/
http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/Forums/News-Article-Comments/Pub-manager-sacked-for-no-travelers-sign
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2118593_gypsies_to_feed_in_to_education_and_health_surveys
http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2118593_gypsies_to_feed_in_to_education_and_health_surveys
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiziganism
www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/Wales/njas_gypsy_
http://www.chavspace.com/news
http://www.journeyfolki.org.uk/Community/HelpResources/CommissionForRacialEqualityCRE/tabid/832/language/en-US/Default.aspx

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 03:11 PM

Never personally seen one anywhere I've been in the UK - always been a fair number of travellers round my way (Essex), grew up on the same patch as a large family of travelling fairground people.

I saw the same news article Sturgeon linked to on the Ice Rink when also googling for such signs - but as for how "common" outside of my personal experience such signs presently are, the fact that it was one of around only four or five image captures of such signs (bar repeats) I found on the web, leads me to think they must be quite unusual nowadays:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22no+travellers%22+sign&hl=en&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=fGg-UM-YPMb04QSn2IHACg&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=618

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 03:16 PM

Jim, you said they were common, I said I had never seen one, and you accused me of lying.
I am no liar, and nor are the others who have never seen one.

You know that they have been illegal here for fourty four years.
Your contention is that the people here are so racist they ignore the law, and the police so racist they allow it.
You are wrong about our people.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 03:21 PM

Sorry, illegal for FOURTY SIX YEARS !

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 03:51 PM

I don't know if the sign is still there but I do know a music pub that bars all "travelling boys". I have argued with the landlord about it and he tells me that before he made the bar "travellers" were groping other people's wives in the dancefloor and if a husband were to object next time he went to the loo he would be followed in and glassed and have the shit kicked out of him. The landlord said that that was the norm not the exception.

I have been to that pub for music events many times - and never seen any hostile event during live music - but the policy came in before my time of doing music at that pub.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 04:19 PM

"Jim, you said they were common, I said I had never seen one, and you accused me of lying."
I countered your persistently implying that my accounts of both seeing and experiencing anti-Traveller prejudice was either made up or imagined with a similar accusation as an example.
I have no doubt whatever that if you say you have not seen these signs, then you probably have not - Hertford has a reasonable policy towards Travellers (sort of). THIS IS NO PROOF THAT THEY DON'T EXIST TO THE EXTENT I HAVE DESCRIBED - IT ONLY MEANS THAT YOU HVE NOT SEEN THEM Up to when we started working with Travellers I cannot remember ever having seen a Travellers site even though there were three within ten minutes walking distance of my home, never mind a pub sign.
You now have a list of around ten references to the practice - read them and weep (or in your case, laugh).
It is, as you say, illegal to discriminate in Travellers in Britain, which makes it all the more disturbing that police turn a blind eye to blatent racism of this sort.
The Lawrence report judged the police as 'institutionally racist' and as far as racism against blacks and Asians, they have been forced to clean up their act to a degree.
Racism towards Travellers, police demanding bribes from them to leave them in peace, dawn raids on sites, refusal of service in shops and pubs.... and many other forms of persecution are still very much part of Travelling life in Britain.
Our collection contains examples of Travellers talking about such events, recordings made by Charles Parker and MacColl have been archived, Philip Donellan made films about it, Sheila Stewart has talked about it..... every single Traveller we have talked to over thirty years has given us accounts about it.
MacOll and Parker used a recording of a West Midlands Justice of the Peace proposing that Travellers who efused to conform should be exterminated (ref. The Travelling People)
Jeannie Robertson summed it up perfectly when she received an MBE, "they gave me this but I couldn't get served in their shops"
I am not surprised in any way that you adopt the attitude you do about Travellers, I have read what you have to say about other ethnic groups.
In this case you are attacking people who I knew, received a great deal of information from, considered many of them my close friends and who trusted me enough to let me into their homes and allow me to record their songs, stories and experiences - all archived and open to public access.
I have little time for your ideas, especially when they are part of a wider attack on families I have met and respected.
Leave them alone.
Incidently - you do lie constantly - to the extent that you have been warned on this forum about posting fake messages site in support of your own arguments.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 04:25 PM

Illegal for 46 years - well within my personal experience which only ended 7 years ago and which was still openly going on in 2005
I actually saw police picking up their bribes in east London in the 80s - 20 - 25 years ago
As I've said - you have your refrences - don't tell me - tell the Commission for Racial Equality
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 04:35 PM

I don't think anybody is denying there is racism directed against Travellers. Just not this particular kind. I most have walked past most of the pubs in Edinburgh/Midlothian and a large fraction of those in Glasgow and I've never seen such a sign, ever, though it's obvious that my local council would dearly love to make them compulsory.

There's blatant racism directed against African-Americans in the US too, but you don't see signs telling them where to sit on the bus any more.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: G-Force
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 04:36 PM

Never seen a sign like that in the UK. However, as a frequent caravanner in France, I have seen signs banning twin-axle caravans from French camp sites, presumably for much the samer reason.

As to whether it's racism - are travellers a race?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 04:52 PM

There used to be a couple of pubs in Harlow had them, but I haven't seen anyt for years. I think any pub showing them would be risking their licence, and would hope so. It is pretty definitely illegal.

That needn't mean there might not be pubs that might try it on in less overt ways, as with other types of racism.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 04:55 PM

Jim, you now say you believe me.
Thanks.
Earlier today you said, in red capitals " I DO NOT BELIEVE FOR ONE MINUTE THAT YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN ONE OF THESE NOTICES "

your persistently implying that my accounts of both seeing and experiencing anti-Traveller prejudice was either made up or imagined,
I never did Jim, just said I had not seen any signs.

I have read what you have to say about other ethnic groups.
It is stupid to generalise about any ethnic group, which is why I never do.

In this case you are attacking people who I knew,
That is a wicked lie.
I have NOT attacked Travellers here or anywhere else.

I have little time for your ideas, especially when they are part of a wider attack on families I have met and respected.
Another lie.
I have expressed no "ideas"
I said I have never seen a sign and could not believe there were still any.
And NO ATTACK WHATSOEVER!
You lie about me Jim, but why?

Incidently - you do lie constantly - to the extent that you have been warned on this forum about posting fake messages site in support of your own arguments.
I do not lie.
I made a Guest appear to admit his lies.
Nobody would or did believe it was anyone but me.
No attempt to deceive.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave Sutherland
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 05:00 PM

Last time I saw one it was in the Barnsley area and it would be around 1976. It said "Van Dwellers Not Admitted"

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Allan Conn
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 05:18 PM

"Anyone else never seen one?"

Can't say I've ever seen one!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,jimmyt
Date: 29 Aug 12 - 08:14 PM

Well, I have to say in 1997, I took my wife and daughters to England, and we hired a car at Gatwick and proceeded toward Stow on the Wold where we had reservations in a B and B. Somewhere in Oxfordshire we decided to stop for lunch in a pub in some village I don't remember, and saw the sign on the door. "No Travellers"   I have to say since i am from US I was totally confused by this, not familiar to the term. I stepped in and asked if they were serving lunch and the Barman said yes, the sign referred to "Gypsies". I remember this is the first (and last ) time I ordered Steak and Kidney pie, an "acquired" taste. This is absolutely a fact. jimmyt

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Allan Conn
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 02:15 AM

"This is absolutely a fact. jimmyt"

Most folk don't seem to be suggesting such signs don't exist anywhere or haven't existed. Just that it isn't 'common' as was being claimed. Come tomorrow I have lived in Britain for 52 years and can't recall ever seeing such a sign. Various other posters who are residents here have said the same. It suggests that if such signs do exist (and I wouldn't try to contradidt what you say) they are in fact very uncommom. I live in the Borders of Scotland but am pretty well travelled throughout Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 02:56 AM

Right - enough of this nonsense
You have had ten links giving direct proof of the widespread and continuing existence of these notices, yet you continue to ignore them and refuse even to acknowledge them - have you read them, are they lies and distortions?
Below is a quote from probably the most authorative book on the subject - The Gypsies, by Sir Angus Fraser (The Peoples of Europe Series, Blackwell, 1992).
You should have no problem with his credentials - he was a civil servant, knighted by your friend Thatcher and appointed adviser to her government in 1988.
His introductory note proves beyond any argument that because of a legal precedent 'Travellers' are not protected by the race discrimination laws and publicans and shopkeepers continue to use it as a get-out for refusing not to serve them - as the above links show, this form of discrimination is both widespread and commonplace today.
I have seen and photographed hundreds, MacColl and Parker covered them thoroughly in 'The Travellling People', Philip Donellan filmed them, and some of our best loved traditional singers have talked about them.
And by the way, your description of Pakistanis as cultural perverts, which you have put your hands up to by repeating what you said on the 'No Irish' thread has forever branded you a racist, and the open warning you were given by a respected administrator in the view of everybody shows you to be a cheat.
Last word on this (for now - off to photograph some more notices in the UK tomorrow.
Jim Carroll

Introduction p 3-5
"Thus, whether or not someone was to be considered a Gypsy was to depend expressly on way of life, and not on cultural or ethnic origins. That definition is today the only one extant in English statute law, since the phrase 'or a gipsy' was finally ex¬punged from the highways legislation as being discriminatory. An ethnic meaning has, however, recently been reaffirmed in a different legal context where precedents created in regard to highways and caravan sites are not necessarily relevant. This came about by virtue of a judgement arising from the 1976 Race Relations Act, which gives protection in Great Britain against discrimination on racial grounds, defined as meaning 'colour, race, nationality, or ethnic or national origins'. Arguments about whether Gypsies were protected by the race relations legislation had increased steadily over the years ever since the first Act of 1965, and much effort had been expended over 'No Gypsies' signs put up by some publicans. These were not unlawful in themselves under the first Act but became so subsequently. Some publicans, however, sought safer ground by resorting to notices saying 'No Travellers', a description which gave rise to trickier legal issues, so much so that, when the Commission for Racial Equality contested the display of such a sign in an east London pub named The Cat and Mutton, the implications had to engage the judicial attention of, first, Westminster County Court in 1987 and then, in 1988, the Court of Appeal.
The question was whether such a denial of access to goods and services was discrimination 'on racial grounds'. The County Court judge refused to accept the CRE's case that 'Traveller' was synonymous and interchangeable with 'Gypsy' and that Gypsies were an ethnic group: he concluded that notices like the one in The Cat and Mutton were not unlawful, and he dismissed the action. The Court of Appeal upheld this finding to the extent that the three judges agreed that 'Traveller' was not synonymous with 'Gypsy' and that the class of persons excluded by the sign was not confined to Gypsies: there had therefore been no direct discrimination. However, they went on to confirm that Gypsies were a racial group for the purposes of the Act. A notice saying 'No Gypsies' would therefore be unlawful; moreover, a 'No Travellers' sign constituted indirect discrimination, to the detriment of Gypsies, by imposing a condition (of not being a Traveller) which fell more heavily on them than on people of other racial groups.
If excuse is needed for having plunged here into such legal niceties, it lies in the fact that we shall find that the question of Gypsy identity has attended their passage through Europe ever since they first arrived, and these legal debates in English courts serve very well to illustrate an important dilemma which refuses to go away in any discussion of Gypsies. Is it the way of life that is the paramount factor in definition? That may be sufficient identification in cases like some of those just mentioned, but it is far from being a complete answer, for where does it leave the many Gypsies who have adopted a settled way of life and do not 'travel', but who nevertheless feel themselves to be Gypsies?'

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 02:57 AM

Jim Carroll, you were wrong to state that" "No Travellers Served" is a common notice throughout Britain "
It is not
Most of us have never seen one in our lives, and to say that does not make us liars or racists.
Far from being common, they are extraordinarily rare, and probably do not exist any more.

You were wrong to suggest that the British people are so racist they ignore the laws.
You were wrong to suggest that the British police are so racist they allow it.
You were wrong about us.
You were wrong about me.
Thank you.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 03:05 AM

your description of Pakistanis as cultural perverts, which you have put your hands up to

I did not describe them as such.
I know nothing about their culture.
I just reported what eminent people with intimate knowledge of that community, and prominent members of that community, stated as THEIR belief, and which applies only to a tiny minority of that community.
I said I had come to believe them, and ask how you just know they are all wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 03:07 AM

And.... I specifically did not suggest ANY were "perverts."

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 03:29 AM

Why will you not refer to the links I have given, all of which cover them, some claiming them to be commonplace, which is my experience over three decades?
Because a handful of individuals here have not seen them is no proof whatever that they do not exist in the numbers that have been quoted
You have evidence of their contued existance and you have a quote from a Thatcher employee as to why Travellers are not even protected under the law.
They exist - they are common - as Travellers are now recognised as an identifiable ethnic group, they are racist - and you - by attempting to show otherwise against all evidence are once again attacking yet another ethnic group on this forum.
YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN ACCESS TO HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF OFFICIALLY RESEARCHED AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE - READ IT AND DISPROVE IT OR YOU HAVE NO CASE
Gone
Jim Carroll
Incidentally, some of the finest literature on Travellers has been produced at Hertford University, Hatfield - I suggest you read some of it - maybe you'll be persuaded not to downgrad the persecution of ethnic minorities - though I doubt it

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 03:38 AM

I have never seen one, and most contributors have not.
That means they are not common.

I am challenging nothing else Jim, but you stated they were common and I disagree.
They are not common.
If they exist at all they are extraordinarily rare.
You were wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 03:40 AM

You are in England now right?
Found any?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 03:47 AM

As you rightly say Keith, the East of England has quite a large number of itinerant or travelling folk. There is for example a small horse fair here, and agricultural work at various times attracts temporary travellers. There are also fields and farms where gypsies can camp. BUT (and I whizz about all over this County of Norfolk) I have never ever in forty years seen one sign about them at all. Not in pubs, not on farm gates, not on village notice boards, not anywhere. Nobody even mentions them particularly. This reminds me a bit of when I lived in Scotland for ten years. The lovely Scots I met were convinced we English hated them. They imagined we spent a lot of time laughing at their kilts and accents. We apparently viewed them as quaint, stingy, primitive and drunk. I could never convince them that actually, we never thought or spoke about them at all. Scotophobia just didn't exist. But they were determined to continue in this mistaken idea.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:08 AM

"YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN ACCESS TO HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF OFFICIALLY RESEARCHED AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE - READ IT AND DISPROVE IT OR YOU HAVE NO CASE"
and no, I am not in England now - pay attention
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:11 AM

What on earth gives you the idea that I would waste valuable holidey time arguing with a racist who will not read nor even refer to evidence put in front of him
YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN ACCESS TO HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF OFFICIALLY RESEARCHED AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE - READ IT AND DISPROVE IT OR YOU HAVE NO CASE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:22 AM

And BTW Eliza
We were regular visitors to Walter Pardon in Knapton, North Norfolk
We recorded Travellers on a site about 5 miles outside Norwich - they'd fled London when the Major government abolished the law saying it was the duty of all Councils to provide stopping places for Travellers (1967 Caravan and Camping Act).
None of the Travellers could get served in the local pubs - most of them had the signs up and those who didn't simply refused service. They were even refused water when they tried to buy it at a local garage
We actually photographed two signs, 1 in Cromer and 1 in Yarmouth -
both of these were used as part of the Traveller campaign to show that such discrimination was nationwide and not just in London.
Sorry - we must have gone to the wrong Norfolk
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:29 AM

You said " "No Travellers Served" is a common notice throughout Britain "
I know from my own experience that it is not.

You said "Because a handful of individuals here have not seen them is no proof whatever that they do not exist in the numbers that have been quoted"

I think it is proof.
How many "individuals" accepted that the notice IS common throughout Britain?
Answer NONE.

You were wrong about us, and about me.
(AGAIN!)

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:45 AM

"I know from my own experience that it is not."
How can you possibly know that - have you really surveyed England for these signs? - you didn't even know they existed till I pointed out the fact that they did to you.
Your not having seen them proves SFA - all it shows is that you, and several other people haven't seen them and nothing else - please don't be silly.
YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN ACCESS TO HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF OFFICIALLY RESEARCHED AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE - READ IT AND DISPROVE IT OR YOU HAVE NO CASE,/font>
You don't even have the bottle to respond to hard and fast evidence put in front of you.
Eliza
Wymondham - that was the "no travellers served here" town.
They had do do their shopping in either Norwich or Thetford.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Owen Woodson
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:55 AM

Oddly enough, despite being extremely well travelled around this country, I have never seen such a notice, and I certainly would not cross the threshold of any pub that displayed one. That doesn't prove anything of course. It could be that I am just in the habit of drinking in pubs where they don't put such notices up.

A few howevers, however:-

I have stood on the front line of many an anti-fascist demo and been called a paedophile and an IRA murderer by the fascists. Needless to say I am neither.

About ten years ago, a notice was placed in a folk festival reception office informing punters that the landlord of one of the local pubs had been refusing to serve asylum seekers. Hopefully he did not enjoy the patronage of any of the festival goers that weekend.

Many years ago, during Whitby festival, the landlord of one of the pubs put up a notice which read "NO HIPPIES OR FOLKSINGERS". This despite the fact that the vast majority of festival goers are highly respectable and very well behaved.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 06:22 AM

"YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN ACCESS TO HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF OFFICIALLY RESEARCHED AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE"

Jim, those of us who live in this country do not need your experts to tell us what it is like.
We live here.
I rate the objectivity of a cross section of Mudcatters way above that of your agenda ridden spokespersons trying to justify their pay-packets.

"No Travellers Served" is NOT a common notice throughout Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Allan Conn
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 06:30 AM

"I know from my own experience that it is not."
How can you possibly know that

.............................

This thread is getting really silly. You have provided evidence that such signs existed so that is fair enough however the main argument seems to be against the assertion that they were 'common' in Britain. Posts from people who have lived in Britain for a long time seem to say that they had never seen such a sign. If they were 'common' then most people would have seen one at some point! It's pretty obvious that they are either a rare occurance - or that we are all lying! I know I'm not and I have no reason to believe that all the other posters are lying either. This whole thread seems to be down to an exaggeration! They may exist, or perhaps have existed, but they don't seem to have been at all common!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 06:37 AM

Jim, allow me to inform you about the country where YOU live, fom an "official" (NCCRI) report.

let us return to the concrete situation of Travellers in Ireland and how they experience discrimination. Individuals, when recognised as Travellers, are sometimes arbitrarily refused entry or access to public places or services such as: shops, pubs, restaurants, laundries, leisure facilities and such like. Individuals often experience verbal or physical abuse because of their identity. Individual Travellers have also reported incidents of insurance companies refusing to provide them with motor insurance cover. A number of public houses consistently refuse to serve Travellers, while others do so now and then. Travellers frequently have difficulty obtaining hotels for wedding receptions. Many policies, procedures, and practices reflect either a lack of acceptance or a total denial of Traveller identity. For many years Travellers experienced segregation in the provision of social welfare services. Travellers who wish to avail of supplementary welfare in Dublin have to accept a 'special' segregated service. Negative stereotypes and scapegoating of Travellers are commonplace. Traveller children in schools have also experienced segregation through 'special classes' although the current policy of the Department of Education is based on the promotion of integration. Nevertheless, some schools still refuse to accept Travellers using the pretext of being full or unsuitable. Travellers are also critical of a system which they feel undermines or largely ignores their identity in the curriculum and school ethos despite the extra capitation grants provided by the government for schools with Travellers among their pupils.

There is also a clear gender dimension to the Traveller experience of racism.5 Many Traveller women are more easily identifiable than Traveller men, and are therefore more likely to experience discrimination. Sometimes evictions are carried out when Traveller men are away, leaving women to deal with the brunt of male verbal and physical abuse. But above all Traveller women, as mothers, home-makers and carers, have to make do with low incomes, in poor living circumstances, without basic facilities such as running water and sanitation.6

Travellers with a disability have usually been cared for in institutions, where assimilation was the norm and where little or no consideration was given to cultural identity.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 06:45 AM

From Martin Collins, a Traveller in Ireland.

Martin Collins
The situation of Travellers in Ireland today can be best described as one of exclusion and oppression.

...the health situation of Travellers is quite poor because of the appalling living conditions that we are forced to live in. I will give two examples: a Traveller man can, on average, expect to live twelve years less than his counterpart in the settled community; the infant mortality rate among Travellers is three times higher than the national average. These are the frightening health statistics for Travellers and it is because of the harsh living conditions that Travellers are forced to live in.

Travellers are treated as outcasts and this is evident in the frequent refusals to serve Travellers in pubs, hotels, restaurants, laundries and so on. Discrimination is also evident in the widespread opposition groups which organise to prevent Traveller sites from being built in 'their' areas. Travellers are not protected from this blatant discrimination. The European Parliament Report on Racism and Xenophobia5 recommended that the only member state that has not already ratified the UN convention on elimination of all forms of racial discrimination do so as soon as possible. That member state is Ireland. Ireland has no anti-racist legislation and is therefore not in a position to ratify this convention

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Owen Woodson
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 07:50 AM

Keith A. I'm sorry but I don't understand this. Are we supposed to accept discrimination against travellers in this country because things are worse in Ireland?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Musket
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 08:26 AM

Most caravan camp sites in UK don't welcome them. The law is accommodated by saying they do not have the facilities to serve the width of Hobby caravans, (a make popular with residential owners due to the size) and do not allow vans such as Transits either, on the basis that is for holiday makers, not those using the site whilst working.

In any event, the aim is to make it such that you feel safer having your valuables around whilst on holiday. I don't think of it as discrimination and support the aims of the camp site owners. I suppose if travellers were allowed on holiday camp sites, I might bump into the caravan that was stolen from me a few years ago and spotted (by the police) being painted and chassis plates removed, but the police told me it would be too much bother and rely on the insurance instead.

So no, I don't think we do discriminate, especially as it appears even the police consider them above the law.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 09:06 AM

I can't see where the bad blood in this thread comes from.

Most people seem to agree that specific signs barring travellers are rarely seen these days in the UK, since they woud be illegal, but that that doesn't mean there isn't continued discrimination against them.

And, with the exception perhaps of that last post from Musket, we seem generally agreed that such discrimination is something to be ashamed of and to try to end.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 09:12 AM

Are we supposed to accept discrimination against travellers in this country because things are worse in Ireland?
No Owen.
Just that Jim should consider the much worse discrimination where he lives, before pontificating about signs in Britain that none of us have ever seen.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 09:39 AM

"Jim, allow me to inform you about the country where YOU live, fom an "official" (NCCRI) report."
And let me inform you that I am aware of the situation here in Ireland and have described it recently - to you - as having reached ethnic cleansing proportions.
I also know and very much respect the work done by Martin Collins and the Travellers organisation Pavee Point
As Owen Woodson has just pointed out, what happens in Ireland is of no relevance whatever to this argument.   
You are, as far as I can see, the only one here defending racist abuse by pretending that its most visible and common form doesn't happen in the UK and the fact that you are doing this by deliberately ignoring the mass of evidence that has been put before you.
YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN ACCESS TO HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF OFFICIALLY RESEARCHED AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE - READ IT AND DISPROVE IT OR YOU HAVE NO CASE, and by openly rejecting it from the racist standpoint that I no longer live in Britain so I have no right to offer a point of view, you dig yourself even deeper into your racist dugout My thirty odd years of work with Travellers was in Britain - as if it mattered - most of the links you have been given are British ones - as if it mattered to anybody but a racist/nationalist
The fact that you and others here have not seen these notices are no proof that the do not exist - the facts contained in the information I have put up are proof that they most certainly do.
You should be aware that most of the prejudice and discrimination shown towards Travellers in Britain mainly effects Irish Travellers.
It is, as you say, illegal you put up 'no Gypsies' notices, but a legal precedent (see above) has made it possible that 'no Travellers' notices are permissable under law, or at least, legally defenceable.
And once more, don't you dare play your favourite race card on me. As if it mattered, I was born and lived all my life in Britain, and your using the fact that I now live in Ireland as an argument makes you every bit the racist I believe you to be.
In my experience, Britain is a deeply racist country - I met it daily in London, and the last legal bastion of that racism is that shown against Travellers.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 09:48 AM

"Just that Jim should consider the much worse discrimination where he lives, before pontificating about signs in Britain that none of us have ever seen."
Which is just what Owen has written.
To racialise racism so that only Brits can discuss it happening in Britain is crass - even for you
My birthplac was Britain, my experience with Travellers was in Britain, my witnessing the prejudice I saw was in Britain - dig away, you're doing a grand job
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 09:49 AM

"In my experience, Britain is a deeply racist country"

"YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN ACCESS TO HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF OFFICIALLY RESEARCHED AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE"

Jim, those of us who live in this country do not need you or your experts to tell us what it is like.
We live here.
I rate the objectivity of a cross section of Mudcatters way above that of your agenda ridden spokespersons trying to justify their pay-packets.

"No Travellers Served" is NOT a common notice throughout Britain.
Britain is NOT a deeply racist country.
The British are among the most tolerant, if not THE most tolerant people in the world.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 10:35 AM

"The British are among the most tolerant, if not THE most tolerant people in the world. "
Rule bloody Brittania
I experienced "nig-nogs, coons, Yids, wogs, wops, thick Paddies.... virtually every day of my working life.
You want an example of racism - try this one for size.
"Jim, those of us who live in this country do not need you or your experts to tell us what it is like.
We live here"
Only Brits are allowed living in Britain are allowed to comment on what we see as British racism - how racist can you get?
You persist in playing the race card - I have no doubt President Assad is saying something very similar at this very moment.
"No Travellers Served" is NOT a common notice throughout Britain"
Yes it it - I know it to be because I saw it regularly right up to the point I stopped recording Travellers, I know it to be because the links I put up (which you will not even acknowledge) tell me that it is still happening as it has always happened, I know it because a Thatcherite civil servant tells me that, thanks to a legal loophole, it is not even against the law - and most of all - I know it because a seasoned racist with a track record running through this forum like Blackpool runss through rock, tells me it isn't because he hasn't seen it.
Oh, and I know it because that individual writes off civil rights organisations, civil servants , education bodies (including his own local one) as "agenda ridden spokespersons trying to justify their pay-packets"
Dig away; the harder you dig the deeper you get.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 10:46 AM

Now look here Mr Carroll, I am married to a very black man, an Ivorian. He has met with nothing but total and delightful kindness and welcome since he arrived here. Wherever we have been, even to London, people have smiled, chatted and shown interest in his Ivory Coast football shirt. He has been bowled over by the lovely people here. He often says to me he has landed in Paradise. I don't know how to write this post in bright red as you do, and don't even see the reason for it, but as a personal view, British folk are super: kind, welcoming and gentle. THEY ARE NOT RACIST. (Why are you on this strange crusade?)

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 11:24 AM

"Only Brits are allowed living in Britain are allowed to comment on what we see as British racism - how racist can you get?

Keith didn't say that, did he? He said that to judge whether something is currently common in a country it helps to be living in the country.

Wouldn't it be better if we all tried to be accurate about the comments we comment on, rather than disagreeing with what people have not actually said and may well not mean?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Musket
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 11:30 AM

McGraw;

I am not ashamed of the fact that I feel safer on a camp site when on holiday if filtering of who is allowed on happens.   I suspect that for all the hand wringing, most people would be active nimby campaigners if a traveller site was next door...

Instead of decrying the idea of holiday camp sites protecting themselves from travellers, maybe a better idea to ask why they feel it necessary?

The first step in changing peoples' mindsets is to acknowledge the reputation travellers have given themselves rather than try and shame people for forming opinions that are, sad as it is, based on evidence.

I notice that when bankers, Tories, anybody with a bob or two more than those posting are being discussed, stereotyping is permissible, yet when we discuss another set of tax avoiding "I'm alright Jack" people who don't buy into society and social obligations, stereotyping is soooo wrong.

Why not just start a thread based on sanctimonious hypocrisy?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Owen Woodson
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 11:41 AM

I wouldn't agree that Irish treatment of Irish travellers is irrelevant to this discussion. Prejudice and discrimination are common human failings the world over and should be fought wherever they appear.

Eliza. I'm glad that your husband is well received over here, and I for one believe that British people are generally more tolerant towards minorities than they were say 50 years ago. That is a view which has been based on my personal observations of living here, but also on research evidence. See for example Matthew Goodwin's writings on political extremism.

But by the same token, racism in football is on the rise again, as are attacks on ethnic minorities, gays etc. And, while the vast majority of people see straight through the various guises which the far right try to adopt, they too are on the rise again.

I won't live to see it unfortunately, but I long for the day when racism is just an obsolete word in the dictionary.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 12:24 PM

I can honestly say that I have heard of such things but only ever seen the exact reverse. On the door of the 'Morning Star', Wardley, some 20-30 years back there was a big sign saying 'Travellers Welcome'! There was a temporary camp on the 'Moss' at the side of the Star and the landlord made so much cash during the time it was there he managed to retire early!

All anecdotal and personal experience of couse and, therefore, completely invalid in this so called argument.

What is neither anecdotal nor personal to me is the obvious fact that someone here is a racist. Anyone who can tar the whole Brotish nation as racist based on the acts of a small mimority is applying th every stereotypes he reckons he is so against.

Ironic? No. Just plain stupid.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 12:35 PM

You have had ten links giving direct proof of the widespread and continuing existence of these notices

If they were widespread they would be obvious to anyone.

None of us who actually live in the UK have seen one in the last 40 years. It seems you haven't either.

There is racism directed against Gypsies in the UK, but not this particular variety of it.

Let's see you find one on a current Google Street View picture of a British pub. If they're widespread it should be easy, right?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 01:07 PM

I suspect that for all the hand wringing, most people would be active nimby campaigners if a traveller site was next door...

We used to have travellers move in and camp on the rugby club field next door, till they put up fences to keep out them, and members of the public. Much better neighbours than the rugby players in many ways. Not so much shouting and swearing at each other.

Why not just start a thread based on sanctimonious hypocrisy?

Maybe you should do that Musket...

.................................. None of us who actually live in the UK have seen one in the last 40 years. If they haven't seen them in 40 years they can't have been in enough pubs back then. But in the last ten years or so I don't think there've been many such notices in evidence. Which doesn't mean there aren't pubs which are still like that, just less openly.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Hornsey Boy
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 01:12 PM

There's a pub on Sussex Way, just of the Hornsey Road, which is currently displaying a 'No Travellers' sign. Shame on it!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 01:12 PM

Look here Ms Eliza
What I described is what I found in three major cities in Britain - Liverpool - my home town, Manchester, my home for 4 years and London, my chosen home for 30 years - unless you would like to claim that I either imagined it or deliberately made it up of course.
Institutional racism was, and as far as I can tell, still is evident in the British police force - please tell the parents of Stephen Lawrence that is not the case.
All the events I have described as happening to Travellers (and to me on occasion) happened.
I too found Norfolk a friendly and welcoming place, with the exception I have outlined – some people seem to have trouble equating the persecution of Travellers as 'racism'.
Again, if you wish to suggest I am either imagining or inventing what I described in Norfolk regarding Travellers as imagination or invention, please feel free.
I am very happy that you and your husband have found peace where you are, there are many in Britain who have not been so lucky; I trust you will find time to spare them an occasional thought.
Why am I on this 'strange crusade' ( strange choice of words for someone who appears to be supporting a zealot who is denying a proven fact and telling others that it is no business of ours because we don't live in Britain)?
Basically because I have been brought up to believe that if you pass by on the other side and ignore persecution and injustice, you become part of it.
Britain has fairly stringent race laws, fought for by people non unlike those just describes as "agenda ridden spokespersons trying to justify their pay-packets"
I have no doubt they would not be there if they were not thought necessary, and should we take our eyes off the ball they will disappear (as has the 1967 Caravan and Camping act) far easier than they appeared
Best
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 01:16 PM

Britain has fairly stringent race laws,
Unlike Ireland.
If we take the persecution and discrimination of Travellers as a yardstick, Ireland is far more racist than us "deeply racist" UK folk.
So what does that make the Irish Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 01:20 PM

"If they were widespread they would be obvious to anyone."
My experience is that where there is a Travellers encampment these notices spring up like toadstools.
I had a call from a friend confirming that they were common in Glasgow BTW
What do you make of the reports I put up - figments or what?
"Why not just start a thread based on sanctimonious hypocrisy?"
Please don't judge others by your own questionable standards
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 01:52 PM

There are lots of pitches around Hertford.
Just no signs.
Your Glasgow friend said they WERE common once.
None now then.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 01:56 PM

If they were widespread they would be obvious to anyone.
My experience is that where there is a Travellers encampment these notices spring up like toadstools.

There have been traveller encampments near me in Midlothian for most of the last 13 years in the summer (the council ordered the eviction of one last year and I haven't seen another one this summer). I have never seen such a sign in a Midlothian pub.

I had a call from a friend confirming that they were common in Glasgow BTW

I spent five years in the 1980s in the east end of Glasgow (where pretty much any kind of bigotry you could imagine was on open display) and never saw one. Whichever foot the regulars kicked with.

Travellers face horrific discrimination in the UK. It is UTTERLY FUCKING STUPID to focus your energies on a mythical wrong when there are so many real ones. "No Travellers" signs in pubs are NOT AN ISSUE, get it?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 02:02 PM

Considering how much mess they leave when trespassing on open spaces locally, and how much they inconvenience local people, we frankly dread their presence. They are normally reported at the earliest opportunity in order to put the wheels in motion to have them moved on.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 02:09 PM

...ten links giving direct proof of the widespread and continuing existence of these notices...have you read them, are they lies and distortions?

OK, let's go through your list:

1. An academic paper that does state that "Racism is pervasive towards nomads [with] 'No Gypsy / Traveler' signs adorning pubs"

However, no examples nor any attempt at proving this statement is forthcoming. Not exactly direct proof.

2. A .pdf file of a book. Forgive me for not reading it all, but it's quite long.

Looking at the chapter headings though, I can't quite see where a discussion of these supposed notices would fit. Perhaps you could point me towards a page number?

3. A amazon link to a novel! Erm, novels aren't true...

4. A Travellers magazine with a couple of anecdotal examples of having difficulty getting served in pubs. No mention of notices.

5. A Travellers rights organisation which states that "signs, used intentionally to exclude Gypsies and Travellers, are still widespread" No evidence for the statement is provided.

6. A Publican's trade magazine giving a single example of such a notice which was immediatly removed and the landlord sacked. Not exactly widespread.

7. A local news site, reporting on an initiative to help gypsies. An individual's comment ""There are still places like pubs with signs saying 'no travellers allowed'". is quoted. Again, no examples are given and there is no mention of widespread.

8. A Wikipedia entry. I didn't bother going any further...

9. equalityhumanrights.com "Page Not Found" error message received.

10. Travellers Social Networking site. The page is quite long, so I only skimmed through it. I couldn't see any mention of such notices, but I may have missed them.

Perhaps you could give me the relevant entries?

11. A summary of 'The Commission for Racial Equality' responsibilities toward travellers.

So, there we are. Instead of ten links giving direct proof of the widespread and continuing existence of these notices we have a grand total of none. Zero, zilch, squat diddly...

Oh yes, and for the record, despite having lived in England all my life I have never seen such a notice either. A few years ago I worked near a gypsy camp. There were half a dozen shops and a couple of pubs close by. Guess what? No Notices.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Hornsey Boy
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 02:27 PM

People seem to have ignored my posting about the Sussex Way pub. The sign is still up there!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 02:29 PM

Hornsey Boy, can you give us the pub name so I can follow it up please?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 02:46 PM

This is the only one I can find.
Nice pic of entrance here.

http://www.northnineteen.co.uk/

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 02:58 PM

BTW, welcome to Mudcat.
Surprised you chose this for your first post.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 03:48 PM

"novels aren't true..."
The significance lies in the title - taken directly from the notices and common enough to be used as such.
And no - I didn't make a note of the relevant passages in no 10 - I did find them, but the refererence to the notices comes up on the search pages, as does all the others.
The rest are indications of the continued practice of barring Travellers because of their ethnic origins
My reasons for putting them up was to point out that the practice was current and widespred, and as said, there are plenty more on offer if you search - do your own homework.
"No Travellers" signs in pubs are NOT AN ISSUE, get it? ....."
I'm quite happy to discuss any issue on Travellers but this thread sprang from a denial of the existance of the most visible and, in my experience, most common manifestation of that discrimination.
And sorry - the signs are an issue because they are visible indications that it is acceptable to victimise a social group, any social group because of their ethnic origins.
Personally I would much rather discuss the fact that they are deprived of somewhere to stop, clean water, sanitation and the right to educate their children, that the deprivation they suffer because of bigotry is a major factor in their having a shortened life-span, that they live in constant fear of redneck attacks.....
My only part in choosing this particular aspect was in pointing out that it happened - Keith took it and ran with it.
Can only repeat what I was told about Glasgow - but have no reason whatever to doubt the word of the Glaswegian who told me.
"Nice pic of entrance here."
Are you implying that the poster is lying and not that the notice was taken down so as not to spoil the photograph and frighten the horses?
"So what does that make the Irish Jim?"
Do I hear the pitter-patter of tiny jackboots?
You made it an issue of Travellers - but widen it to teh Irish if that's what turns you on - I won't complain of thread-drift unlike....
"There are lots of pitches around Hertford."
And as I said, Hertford establishment has a progressive policy (sort of) towards Travellers which tends to militate agains such notices.
"Your Glasgow friend said they WERE common once."
He only said it once, but that's not what you mean of course - he said they were common in Glasgow - your point?
He also said "why do you bother with that fascist moron?" - he only said that once as well.
"Considering how much mess they leave when trespassing on open spaces locally"
We seem to be heading for the "they deserve eveything they get" option, which underlines pefectly the importance of dealing with every aspect of bigotry as it comes up.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 03:50 PM

if you pass by on the other side and ignore persecution and injustice, you become part of it.

Well said! I was going to make my previous post my last but this statement has inspiered me :-)

The Irish are stupid = racist
Jews are tight-fisted = racist
Blacks are over sexed = racist
Gypsies are thieves = racist

The British are racist = acceptable
Men are rapists = acceptable
Whites are supremists = acceptable
Americans are fat = acceptable

How many more examples do I need to have before someone realises that there is NO DIFFERENCE between one type of negative stereotyping and another?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Musket
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 04:09 PM

Mr Carroll;

Of course, your friends whom you carry a cross for are, every one of them, inclusive, law abiding, welcoming and wanting to be welcomed, straight as a die good chaps who always think of others, always clear up after themselves, are never found nicking copper off railway systems and would be horrified to think that their actions could ever harm or even mildly inconvenience anybody else.

I was particularly interested in the wonderful aims of the Diddycoy Equality Scheme that they all obviously sign up to. It makes it far easier for pillocks to overlook their faults by calling decent people racist.

You said you were never brought up to pass by on the other side. Your rose tinted glasses seem to be doing exactly that.

My standards are, like everybody else's questionable. Luckily, I don't sign up to your standards so I am not asking myself too many questions....

I spent many years selling construction plant and there are many people from travelling backgrounds whom I call my friends, and there are many non travellers I call my friends. I don't stereotype any more than you do. The difference being, I don't judge others at the same time. I feel safer if travellers are not allowed on holiday camp sites and as such I applaud the attempts of camp site owners to ensure people can enjoy their holiday. I am comfortable with that stance. I have had items stolen by travellers on numerous occasions. Non travellers? Far far less. I'm comfortable with judging people by their actions. A bit like insurance underwriters have to.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 04:35 PM

I imagine Mudcatters are likely to frequent a good number of pubs. Maybe if they spot a notice like this in any of them they could post there details here, as well as reporting it to the appropriate authorities.

But I am certain from my own experience, signs like these are a lot less common than they would have been a few years ago - when Jim was over here. (I note that in one post he said he hadn't personally seen any since about 2005, and that would fit in with my experience.)

But of course if you get refused service in a pub it's pretty had to prove precisely why that happened. Ethnic discrimination is a hard thing to prove, and that's one factor that helps it continue. "He had muddy clothes on... he appeared aggressive..."

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 04:57 PM

what is the point of all this arguing?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,wyrdolafr
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:05 PM

McGrath of Harlow, regarding 'proving' discrimination, in the 'other' thread I pointed out that I'd seen signs refusing entry/serving skinheads and 'crusties' in the past. These are/were pretty easy people to spot as they're both fairly distinctive and iconic subcultures.

I'm still struggling to understand how bar staff would actually spot a Traveller from anyone else waiting to be served. Unless they literally parked a caravan of some description outside, I'd have thought, in 2012, it was impossible to pick out a Traveller from anyone else. In somewhere like Manchester, even singling out someone with an Irish accent or Irish name would be pointless as there's so many people with Irish heritage around here.

What's even more baffling is that I'd have thought Jim was actually pleased that evidence of the existence of these signs in 2012 is so scarce. Yet he seems to be outraged at anything anyone says and chooses to interpret this as racism/wilful ignorance/stupidity.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:12 PM

It is fairly easy to spot travellers,hard to describe why, but they are distictive
here in Ireland they are called knackers, SOME OF THEM ARE OK PEOPLE SOME ARE NOT, much like the non traveller community.
travellers in ireland have caused less problems than some of the non travellers such as1 sean quinn,2 the managing director of anglo irish bank,3 biffo cowen, 4 enda kenny, 5 bertie ahern to name a few

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:14 PM

How would you for instance tell the difference between a fat female traveller wearing black leggings and a fat female Forex Trader wearing black leggings, both equally hideos in appearance - tell me that? Ah perhaps when they open their mouths!!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:19 PM


Are you implying that the poster is lying and not that the notice was taken down so as not to spoil the photograph and frighten the horses?
Yes I am.
He is a troll.
There is nothing on streetview picture either.
If it were a real post I would check further.
Just a troll.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 05:28 PM

Good Soldier Schweik, can you eleborate? I'm googling pics of Irish Travellers now and I genuinely couldn't pick one out from a crowd of non-Travellers. I'm seeing dark, fair, ginger, bald, fat, thin, muscular, freckly, non-freckly, smart, scruffy... they seem as disparate a group of people as any random collection of people from Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: CET
Date: 30 Aug 12 - 07:16 PM

"what is the point of all this arguing?"

A fair question, and in fact I hope the thread will go away at some point. However, viciousness and dishonesty of the kind displayed by Jim Carroll should not go unchallenged, ever.

He has called Keith "racist", "moron" and "tosser" on this and the related thread because Keith called him on his assertion that "no travelers" signs are, not were, common throughout Britain. I have followed this thread with some interest and a few things seem clear:

1. No travelers signs may have existed, but if they exist at all today, they are vanishingly rare.

2. Jim's personal knowledge of no travelers signs dates back several years, and even then they were not common.

3. Even people who are probably more closely aligned politically with Jim than with Keith don't agree that no travelers signs are (not were) common in pubs throughout England.

4. Jim has not provided any evidence that no travelers signs are, not were, common in pubs in England.

5. Keith has writte not one word that justifies the label racist.

6. The fact that Jim has sympathy for the mistreatment suffered by travelers is no kind of excuse for his conduct on these threads.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 03:48 AM

A few words before I go
CET
1.   "No travelers signs may have existed, "
These signs were by far the most common open indications of prejudice in the places I have mentioned up to 2005, when they were still to be found in the Bristol area around the sites I visited.
They were common enough in London in the 70s and 80s and into the 90s for the Travellers themselves, assisted by sympathetic solicitors, local politicians and student sympathisers, to have mounted a specific campaign of photographing them and present them as evidence of racial prejudice.
It doesn't surprise me that people here haven't seen them - I can't recall having done so before my involvement with Travellers in the early 70s – but then again, I was staggered by the dozens of Traveller sites not far from my home that I had not seen.
If they have disappeared in the last half dozen years I am delighted to hear it (maybe the London Roadside Travellers Group campaign was more successful than I thought), but I know from documented fact that they still exist, and I also know from continuing personal contact with Travellers that they still face harassment and discrimination in the form of being refused service in pubs and shops.
2    " ...and even then they were not common."
Sorry, but yes they were; they've been used on film, talked about by people like The Stewarts, Gordon Boswell, Minty Smith.... and all the Travellers recorded and featured on radio and TV programmes... Listen to 'The Travelling People' or 'Doomsday in the Afternoon (Stewarts Programm) MacColl, Seeger and Parker made them a feature in virtually everything they did on Travellers (I think Dick Snell may have used them in his excellent 'The Travellers Came to Redbridge."
Our recorded collection (archived and accessible at the British Library and in Dublin) includes interviewees describing them).
3 & 4    See above
5 "Keith has writte not one word that justifies the label racist."
Yes he has, and has been accused of doing so by others - see Muslim Prejudice thread which he kept alive for an obscene length of time when he set out to prove that all British Pakistanis were perverts who had to suppress their "culturally implanted" desire to have sex with underage women.
Our antipathy towards each other is very much a two-way street, as is our insulting and name-calling and covers immigration in general, Muslims, Palestine/Israel, Brievik the "insane" mass murderer, Ireland, British fascism, and now, it would seem, Travellers - all 'racist' or sectarian based.
I find our arguments an embarrassment as they invariably end up dominating threads and destroying them, but before you apportion blame I suggest you read through some of them (Muslim Prejudice, the War and Peace of Mudcat threads) will keep you happy for a few weeks. 6    "no kind of excuse for his conduct on these threads"
I make no apology for my arguments here, and I certainly make no apology for handling Keith the way I have.
Between us we managed to nause up yet another thread, following which Keith went on to set up this one, all in order to dispute something I know to be a fact - from personal experience and from the experiences of others.
Keith's argument, and that of other posters, has been "these signs don't exist because I haven't seen them" - not an argument that would stand up in many courts I think!
I have seen and photographed them and they do/did exist, in great numbers not so long ago.
As Jack Campin rightly and wisely pointed out "Travellers face horrific discrimination in the UK" I disgree with his suggestion that these signs are not important; they certainly played a major part in making 'anti-Travellerism' a 'respectable' or at leas, acceptable form of racism, and if they are still around, as I believe they ar, they will continue to add to a prejudice that ruins people's health to the point of shortening their lives, treats a whole ethnic group as sub-human and forces them to live in Third World Conditions.
Sorry - no apology for that.
BTW "He is a troll."
Keith has just accused a poster of lying on the basis that a publican wishing to publicise his pub could quite possibly have removed a 'no Traveller' notice before taking a publicity photograph - one of several possible explanations. Will try to be fairer with Keith in future but, given behavior like this, can't promise.
Now to Merrie England
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Musket
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 03:58 AM

I wonder why Doncaster has a sign at the start of a dual carriageway saying "No racing of horse drawn vehicles." I recall one outside Chichester too.

Seems a bit odd?

OK

There is mistreatment of travellers. There is also mistreatment of old people, children, Asians, women, gays, white blokes. (That last one.. You never see us in "quota" numbers for public sector employers, yet we have to put up with it.)

Regarding travellers, and thinking of when the health authority I chaired engaged health visitors with a site.. The local people questioned why we were spending NHS money on them. The travellers by and large didn't engage with us and I was resigned to saying in a public meeting that we were aware of a TB cluster in the regional travellers community and it is a good use of NHS money as the travellers use the same shops, pubs etc as non travellers and we don't want TB spreading. (One advantage that travellers have with regard to letting infections fizzle out is that they cohort without being asked.)

The hostility of the locals to the site, and not all were readers of the gutter press and self righteous, got me thinking. Racism, discrimination and every other term is plain wrong. Really is. But throwing labels around isn't the answer. Understanding why there is division is a start.

We have this notion of society. Society is not a spectator sport. In order to engage and be engaged, you need to lace up your boots and run out onto the pitch, or you are not seen as part of the game, and if you loiter on the pitch, the players want you removed so the game can carry on.

No rights, no wrongs, just fed up of the easy option chosen by shallow people of labelling everybody who doesn't agree with how you conduct your stance of not liking seeing people labelled....

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 04:04 AM

I recall around the 80's seeing signs on pub doors saying 'No Bedrollers'

I think they meant 'New Age Travellers'

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 04:10 AM

Jim, are we British "deeply racist" by our genes or are we culturally implanted with it?

Keith has just accused a poster of lying on the basis that a publican wishing to publicise his pub could quite possibly have removed a 'no Traveller' notice before taking a publicity photograph
No Jim.
I was prepared to believe it and began looking in to it.
Then I noticed that the troll had never posted here before.
He was just winding us up, but you could give the place a call or visit them next week.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 04:11 AM

On the other thread both me and another party mentioned that we'd never seen such signs. When KeithA said he'd never seen such signs likewise, JimC accused KeithA of outright lying - which, by clear implication - he was also accusing us of doing.

I know Jim and Keith have 'issues' but I also know that I'm not "lying" when I say I've never seen such a sign, and so for my own part I'm actually quite glad the matter has been cleared up here, because frankly the implied smear, bugged me somewhat.

That said, as a quick google reveals, such signs do obviously appear on occasion. I found five image captures of such signs on the web: two from news stories in the last couple of years, in both instances action was taken. The other three from the last decade, with the oldest dated 2003. So yes, they evidently do exist, but clearly not on the large scale implied by "common".

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Hornsey Girl
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 04:45 AM

Take no notice of my old man.
He's a feckin eeejit.
There have been no signs of any kind in Hornsey for a thousand years to my certain knowledge.
Hope that clears things up.
keith (Doh!)

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,wyrdolafr
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 05:07 AM

"Keith's argument, and that of other posters, has been "these signs don't exist because I haven't seen them" - not an argument that would stand up in many courts I think! "

Jim, this is where the problem lies. "Other posters" are not saying this at all. By far and away the point people have been making is that they're not "common". We haven't been saying they don't exist *at all*, or that they have *never existed* (in possibly fairly large numbers), just the idea that they're "common" *now* in 2012.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 06:36 AM

As Jack Campin rightly and wisely pointed out "Travellers face horrific discrimination in the UK" I disgree with his suggestion that these signs are not important; they certainly played a major part in making 'anti-Travellerism' a 'respectable' or at least, acceptable form of racism

Not anywhere I've been, they didn't. The failure of the council to provide adequate rubbish collection services to sites played a real role (as it does in Gypsy settlements in eastern Europe) - your bugbear didn't.

Your obsessional focus on this issue is counterproductive. The reaction of most non-Travellers (just about none of whom will ever have seen such a sign) would be "if that is all they have to complain about, they should just quit whining". Is that the message you're trying to get across?


These signs were by far the most common open indications of prejudice in the places I have mentioned up to 2005

Around here the commonest open indication of prejudice was people being driven off their encampments by force. You just need to read the local paper to know about that.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 10:31 AM

Jim, this is where the problem lies. "Other posters" are not saying this at all.
None of us said anything you could possibly argue with, so Jim pretends we said something stupid that he CAN argue against.

I have had many "discussions" with Jim and he does it every time.
I am supposed to have made racist statements, supported massacres, celebrated chemical attacks, and much else.

Funny in its way, but nasty, malicious lies all the same.

Now he has gone to "Merrie (deeplye raciste) Englande this thread will end.
I hope he keeps a record of all the signs he sees, that are so common throughout Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Hornsey Boy
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 12:57 PM

Wrong pub, Keith. Do try harder!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 04:32 PM

Funnily enough at Addington Hills near Croydon where they took over a car parklast year, they were in for a big surprise because that car park is used by queers for their bum bashing!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 06:24 PM

Bonzo, you've just won my personal award for the most brilliantly prurient Shameless episode that Mudcat could ever come up with. God bless Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: framus
Date: 31 Aug 12 - 08:27 PM

Bonzo done a cracker there!
Would you like your drive tarmaced, soor? Be there just as soon as I can get out from under this Brit Onanist!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Musket
Date: 01 Sep 12 - 06:17 AM

I thought your car was worth a bob or two Bonzo? I wouldn't keep parking it there if I were you........

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Owen Woodson
Date: 01 Sep 12 - 08:43 AM

Isn't Bonzo3legs the last word in bigotry and prejudice? I recently informed someone that I had attended a Gay Pride march. She replied, "You must be turning into a queer".

I said that I'm not turning into anything, that I've been heterosexual all my life and will be staying that way, that the term "queer" is offensive, that I've known quite a few gays in my time who have been perfectly nice and normal people, that I was on the march because I will join in solidarity with anyone who suffers discriminatio for whatever reason, and that nobody - homosexual or heterosexual - can do anything about their sexual orientation. It is something we are born with.

Anybody fancy a march against Bonzo3legs?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Sep 12 - 08:53 AM

I'm sorry but men lurking with other men in the bushes is very queer to my way of thinking, especially in a public open space in broad daylight.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Sep 12 - 10:07 AM

is it just gay men you dont like bonzo ,or do u dislike gay women too?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Sep 12 - 10:19 AM

Sorry, no time to argue, have to pack for holiday.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 01 Sep 12 - 10:22 AM

Now if we want to move on to NO LOITERING signs, those ARE real. I've never seen one in a car park though.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Sep 12 - 02:22 PM

How bout men lurking about men lurking with women in the bushes in a public open space in broad daylight, bonzo?

Nowt so queer as folk as they say - but it isn't just gay men who go in for that kind of thing.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 01 Sep 12 - 02:25 PM

Hope you have a lovely holiday Bonzo3legs.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 01 Sep 12 - 02:52 PM

Thank you very much Eliza.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Owen Woodson
Date: 01 Sep 12 - 03:00 PM

Well, you know what they say. There's nowt so queer as homophobes.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 02 Sep 12 - 12:45 PM

sounds like Bonzo needs a holiday,I would suggest Barking

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 02 Sep 12 - 01:13 PM

No, Playa San Juan north of Alicante actually!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 10 Sep 12 - 06:34 AM

Travellers being evicted in Croydon today have removed part of the fencing surrounding the space in which they illegally squatted. Now I wonder why such sludge would want to do that???

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Sep 12 - 08:59 AM

"your bugbear didn't."
One more time - yes it did.
While we were away we got to meet family members of some of the singers we recorded.
One described how "No Travellers served" notices was the first writing she learned to recognise- thanks to the deliberate policy of not allowing them to stop long enough to get an aducation she didn't manage to learn to read until in her mid teens.
We were shown two pubs in the Bristol area that still displayed these notices, one in a front window, the other inside over the bar.
The people we met where highly amused at the suggestion that these notices were either scarce or no longer around.
Over the last ten years it has been more common practice to display them inside the pubs, but since Dale Farm they have moved back into prominence in full public view.
One Traveller told us that the most humiliating practice was of going into a bar and, where they are suspected of being Travellers, ignored by the bar-staff and eventually having to walk out unserved.
Not only have these notices always existed - throughout the time we worked with Travellers anyway, but they, and other forms of racist discrimination appear to be on the increase.
I remembered this, from a review of our Travellers CD in Musical Traditions, from Geoff Wallis

"FROM PUCK TO APPLEBY: SONGS OF IRISH TRAVELLERS IN ENGLAND
Musical Traditions Mtcd325-6; 2 Cds; 158 Minutes; 2003
It may be 2003, but the window of a pub just a couple of hundred yards from my front door still carries the sign 'Travellers by Appointment Only' and they don't mean salespeople from the snacks industry. In many other ways, however, the lives of Irish travellers in England have changed substantially since Jim Carroll and Pat Mackenzie made these recordings of their songs and stories between 1973 and 1985 (with the assistance of Denis Turner). As the collectors note, the ready availability of the portable television was already sounding the death knell for the fireside gatherings at which many of these songs were passed on."

Guest CS
"but I also know that I'm not "lying" when I say I've never seen such a sign"
And I never accused you of doing so - or if I did, please point it out.
On the other hand, I described having seen these signs in Salford and you seemed to be doubting my word.
"You just need to read the local paper to know about that."
I am not claiming that these signs are the main form of abuse, I am saying they are a part of the dehumanisation of Travellers that has made other abuses acceptable - I do read the papers and am fully aware of what is happening to Travellers - up to 7 years ago I was witnessing it first hand and occasionally been on th receiving end, due to the company I chose to keep - I have yet to read here that anybody else has spent any significant time with Travellers.
This thread was started by Keith to call into doubt the existance or the occurrence of these signs - am happy to expand it to other abuses I have read about and personally witnessed (at the risk of accusations of thread drifty by the OP)
Keith
Will cover your own racism later as you seem to be incapable of dealing with more than half a dozen sentences at a time.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Sep 12 - 09:24 AM

Jack
Was wondering - if you saw a sign reading "No Blacks served" or "No Asians" or "No Irish" (how this whole discussion started), would you consider it as unimportant as you seem to in regard to Travellers, and tell them to "quit whining"
Look forward to your answer with some interest.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 10 Sep 12 - 09:28 AM

I don't think that blacks, asians, irish or any other decent people for that matter would destroy or leave property in a disgusting mess just so that they can illegally occupy the property again after being evicted!!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Sep 12 - 10:19 AM

Thank you for making my point about racism so perfectly Bozo - I owe you one!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: kendall
Date: 10 Sep 12 - 12:28 PM

I've been to the UK several times and visited many pubs. I have only seen that sign once.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 10 Sep 12 - 12:42 PM

"We were shown two pubs in the Bristol area that still displayed these notices, one in a front window, the other inside over the bar."

I hope that you informed the police about the pubs you saw these signs in?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Sep 12 - 01:11 PM

"I hope that you informed the police about the pubs you saw these signs in?"
No I didn't - I learned from bitter experience that:
A The police do not act on such reports - see my account of reporting a proposed fire bomb attack on Traveller families on Mitcham Common.
B Such reports can often lead to harassment of Travellers by police and an escalation of prejudiced activity by local businesses.
And most importantly:
C The Travellers we know prefer to deal with it in their own way - in the case of English Travellers, through The Romany Guild or The Gypsy Council - with others, through sympathetic supporter groups In the good old days of the GLC, Ken Livingstone was incredibly helpful but Maggie put paid to that.
The Irish, Scots and Welsh Travellers in London had their own group and mounted a vigorous campaign against the signs, but this died a death when the Major Government repealed the 1968 Caravan and Camping Act, leaving all but a tiny handful of Travellers with no legal stopping places.
Most Travellers we know prefer to keep a low profile (and not "whinge") and work around the ban in other ways.
I take it from your failure to respond that you accept my assurance that I in no way implied that you were lying when you claimed that you had never seen these signs?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Sep 12 - 04:26 PM

I take it from your failure to respond that you accept my assurance that I in no way implied that you were lying when you claimed that you had never seen these signs?

You accused me of lying for saing exactly that.
That clearly implies that such a claim is a lie.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Sep 12 - 04:29 PM

" I DO NOT BELIEVE FOR ONE MINUTE THAT YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN ONE OF THESE NOTICES "

Your capital letters were in red Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 03:21 AM

I replied like with like - I told you that I had seen many of these notices; you claimed, and as far as I can see, are still saying that they either didn't exist, or were so rare that they weren't worth bothering about - a direct contradiction to what I had witnessed and knew to be a fact.
I do not believe, nor have I claimed that Guest CS is lying - his silence on the matter indicates that he accepts that.
In your case, your reputation f distorting what othrs say, directly lying about what you have posted and not posted (eg your Pakistani implant claim), even to the extent of your fakin postings in your own support (caught red-handed and warned about that one) goes before you.
I later withdrew what was meant to be a mirror of your own behaviour, and that remains as said.
Back to subject:
Something mor to reject as the work of "agenda ridden spokespersons trying to justify their pay-packets" - this time, The Runneymede Trust.
"Discrimination
Gypsies have suffered discrimination by being refused service in public houses and shops, entry to dance halls and youth clubs, even on at least one occasion (in Sheffield) not allowed on a bus.
Discrimination is not a new phenomenon. Here is an example taken from an article in The Countryman recalling the 1920s.
"In season, the itinerants poured in, to pea pick, single out and so on; tramps, Gypsies and Travellers of every kind. 'No Gypos' read the notice on the pub door."
The Commission for Racial Equality and its predecessor, the Race Relations Board, received many complaints in particular about pubs with 'No Gypsies' signs outside. Letters 'achieved some success' in the removal of signs but recently new wording 'No Travellers' has been used. Under the Race Relations Act such a sign may be seen as discriminating indirectly against Romany Gypsies. The pub owner would need to justify the sign and a suitable test case is awaited to see how these notices could be justified. Under the Race Relations Act only the CRE can prosecute a discriminator. All that Gypsies can do is refer these signs, and refusals of service, to the CRE and leave it to the Commission to decide which cases to take up.
Notices are becoming more subtle, such as 'Travellers by Appointment only', so that a Gypsy with limited reading ability will see the sign as applying to him, but in case of prosecution the landlord might get away with arguing that he was referring to commercial travellers.
In two cases where clubs rather than pubs were concerned, the cases were settled out of court with an apology to the Traveller who had been refused entry. One involved an Irish Traveller but - because it never reached the stage of a trial - the argument that Irish Travellers are an ethnic group has never been settled."
This from 'On The Verge' by Donald Kendrick and Sian Bakewell University of Hertfordshire Press, 1995 – First published by the Runnymede Trust 1992.
If you want some real spooky bedtime reading try The Gypsy and The State The ethnic cleansing of British society' by Derek Hawes and Barbara Perez, School For Advanced Urban Studies, Bristol 1995.
You have had more than enough evidence; now address it instead of attempting to lead this up a blind alley - I have already said I do not believe you are lying (in this case - does not mean you haven't in the past).
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 03:33 AM

I just said that the signs are not "common throughout Britain."

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 05:34 AM

You claimed much more than that and you've had evidence that they were, and almost certainly are still common throughout Britain; common enough for Mrs Thatcher's favourite civil servant to refer to them in his magnificent book and cite one of them as being used as a test case in court which set a legal precedent (or does he count as another of those "agenda ridden spokespersons trying to justify their pay-packets"
You are obviously not going to have the good grace to accept the indisputable evidence placed before you in huge amounts (or even to refer to it), so I suggest we leave this as another case of your denigrating yet another ethnic minority by denying the facts of their persecution, and leave it there.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 05:58 AM

Jim, you stated that ""No Travellers Served" is a common notice throughout Britain "

I denied it.
I was right and you were wrong, as usual.

All the evidence you put up was gone through by CS, and found not to be evidence at all.
The first hand evidence of numerous Mudcatters actual experience clearly showed that the signs are NOT common throughout Britain.

You were wrong about that Jim, and that is all I have argued.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 05:59 AM

you've had evidence that they were, and almost certainly are still common throughout Britain

Erm, kind of not, Jim. The complete opposite would be nearer the truth. You really do spout some crap.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 06:02 AM

Which "two pubs in the Bristol area" Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,PeterC
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 06:03 AM

Get the bloody chip off your shoulder Carroll.

For information I have seen such signs but not in any of the five towns that I have lived in or any of the others that I have worked in. Common is specific locations - possibly. Common THROUGHOUT Britain - bollocks!

And if you want to call me a racist then have the guts to come to London and do it to my face!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 08:22 AM

"And if you want to call me a racist then have the guts to come to London and do it to my face!
Not calling you a racist - that's reserved for people who describe Pakistanis as having cultural implants that make the paedophiles.
This is the only suggestion I have made here of anybody being racist.
I Lived in London and worked with Travellers for thirty years where these signs were in abundance, also Bristol and Birmingham (West Midland historically worst place in Britain for Travellers). We recorded accounts of them all over Britain. Plenty of evidence in Liverpool and reports from Leeds Swansea, Glasgow.... et al
Widespread enough for me.
If you live in London - why not have the guts to nip into the B.L. on Euston Road - you can listen to the recordings of Travellers describing the racial abuse they encountered in all these places - all freely accessible.   
"and found not to be evidence at all."
And I responded to every point he made - you probably never got round to reading that and why should you; you refused to read all the evidence provided on the basis that it was from "agenda ridden spokespersons trying to justify their pay-packets"
The 'widespread' examples are all contained in the references given.
Can I make something clear here - I have called no-one here other than   Keith a racist.
He started this thread in order to challenge the documented abuse of Travellers and it fits in perfectly with his 'Pakistani' claim.
"Which "two pubs in the Bristol area" Jim?"
Will happily share this information Keith (even in view of the way you treated other such information) - in return for your giving me the names and quotes of the 'prominent people' who inspired your "implant" theory - it should be an easy enought task, I won't hold my breath though!
Otherwise - don't call us - we'll call you
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 08:28 AM

PS
My offer includes letting you have copies of the recordings we made of Travellers describing the abuse they have faced, even though similar descriptions are to be found on 'The Travelling People' Radio Ballad which includes a suggestion from a Birmingham JP that all Travellers who refuse to conform be "exterminated"
I await your response with anticipation.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 08:47 AM

He started this thread in order to challenge the documented abuse of Travellers

No.
It was to find out if "no travellers" signs are common throughout Britain as you claimed.
We found they are not.

in return for your giving me the names and quotes of the 'prominent people' who inspired your "implant" theory
It was never my theory
It was that of these eminent people:-
Jack Straw, Keighley MP Ann Cryer, Mohammed Shafiq, Lord Ahmed, Jasmin Alibhai-Brown.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 09:07 AM

"Jack Straw, Keighley MP Ann Cryer, Mohammed Shafiq, Lord Ahmed, Jasmin Alibhai-Brown."
No of whom ever made a claim which implicated "All male Pakistanis"
Had they done so they would not only have committed professional suicide, but they would have faced criminal charges for incitement to race hatred.
All your own work Keith
However, should you produce evidence to the contrary, my offer still stands - shouldn't be too difficult.
"We found they are not."
No you didn't - all you could claim is that you had never seen them - nothing more.
Jim Carroll

On the other hand - once more:
"Discrimination
Gypsies have suffered discrimination by being refused service in public houses and shops, entry to dance halls and youth clubs, even on at least one occasion (in Sheffield) not allowed on a bus.
Discrimination is not a new phenomenon. Here is an example taken from an article in The Countryman recalling the 1920s.
"In season, the itinerants poured in, to pea pick, single out and so on; tramps, Gypsies and Travellers of every kind. 'No Gypos' read the notice on the pub door."
The Commission for Racial Equality and its predecessor, the Race Relations Board, received many complaints in particular about pubs with 'No Gypsies' signs outside. Letters 'achieved some success' in the removal of signs but recently new wording 'No Travellers' has been used. Under the Race Relations Act such a sign may be seen as discriminating indirectly against Romany Gypsies. The pub owner would need to justify the sign and a suitable test case is awaited to see how these notices could be justified. Under the Race Relations Act only the CRE can prosecute a discriminator. All that Gypsies can do is refer these signs, and refusals of service, to the CRE and leave it to the Commission to decide which cases to take up.
Notices are becoming more subtle, such as 'Travellers by Appointment only', so that a Gypsy with limited reading ability will see the sign as applying to him, but in case of prosecution the landlord might get away with arguing that he was referring to commercial travellers.
In two cases where clubs rather than pubs were concerned, the cases were settled out of court with an apology to the Traveller who had been refused entry. One involved an Irish Traveller but - because it never reached the stage of a trial - the argument that Irish Travellers are an ethnic group has never been settled."
and from Mrs Thatchers pet Civil Servant:
"since the phrase 'or a gipsy' was finally ex¬punged from the highways legislation as being discriminatory. An ethnic meaning has, however, recently been reaffirmed in a different legal context where precedents created in regard to highways and caravan sites are not necessarily relevant. This came about by virtue of a judgement arising from the 1976 Race Relations Act, which gives protection in Great Britain against discrimination on racial grounds, defined as meaning 'colour, race, nationality, or ethnic or national origins'. Arguments about whether Gypsies were protected by the race relations legislation had increased steadily over the years ever since the first Act of 1965, and much effort had been expended over 'No Gypsies' signs put up by some publicans. These were not unlawful in themselves under the first Act but became so subsequently. Some publicans, however, sought safer ground by resorting to notices saying 'No Travellers', a description which gave rise to trickier legal issues, so much so that, when the Commission for Racial Equality contested the display of such a sign in an east London pub named The Cat and Mutton, the implications had to engage the judicial attention of, first, Westminster County Court in 1987 and then, in 1988, the Court of Appeal.
The question was whether such a denial of access to goods and services was discrimination 'on racial grounds'. The County Court judge refused to accept the CRE's case that 'Traveller' was synonymous and interchangeable with 'Gypsy' and that Gypsies were an ethnic group: he concluded that notices like the one in The Cat and Mutton were not unlawful, and he dismissed the action. The Court of Appeal upheld this finding to the extent that the three judges agreed that 'Traveller' was not synonymous with 'Gypsy' and that the class of persons excluded by the sign was not confined to Gypsies: there had therefore been no direct discrimination. However, they went on to confirm that Gypsies were a racial group for the purposes of the Act. A notice saying 'No Gypsies' would therefore be unlawful; moreover, a 'No Travellers' sign constituted indirect discrimination, to the detriment of Gypsies, by imposing a condition (of not being a Traveller) which fell more heavily on them than on people of other racial groups.
If excuse is needed for having plunged here into such legal niceties, it lies in the fact that we shall find that the question of Gypsy identity has attended their passage through Europe ever since they first arrived, and these legal debates in English courts serve very well to illustrate an important dilemma which refuses to go away in any discussion of Gypsies. Is it the way of life that is the paramount factor in definition? That may be sufficient identification in cases like some of those just mentioned, but it is far from being a complete answer, for where does it leave the many Gypsies who have adopted a settled way of life and do not 'travel', but who nevertheless feel themselves to be Gypsies?"

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 09:17 AM

They all ascribed the over-representation of that group, in that crime, to aspects of the culture.
Deny that?
Culture impinges to a greater or lesser extent, on all within it.
True?

Now Jim, which two pubs in the Bristol area?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 10:48 AM

Here's an interesting one.

Measles is on the increase within the travelling people. Fact. Hard public health observatory fact and trying to be addressed by NHS.

The problem is that many travellers are not presenting their children for vaccination.

How many here would be happy with their children sharing a school place with children of travellers who are instrumental by their chosen inactions to spread this almost unheard of these days disease?

Likewise, sharing a pub, shop (benefits office?) when TB is on the increase and many refusing to come forward for treatment?

You see, badgers we can cull. Not everyone would agree but we can. Travellers are fellow humans who choose to dip into society when it pleases them. Well, society might want a say in that too.

Have regard to public health if you mingle with others. Pay taxes on what you earn and leave sites as you find them, rather than as a disgusting mess for the rest if us to clean up.

Then perhaps the signs, the very very few signs, might go away.

For now, bugger smoking in pubs. I want publicans to protect me from TB. I want schools and playgrounds full of kids who have been protected. In short, I want what society offers. It can only offer if everyone abides by simple moral decency. Not much to ask.

Actually it is whilst people who don't live here preach that we are bigots if we complain about hygiene, crime etc.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 10:56 AM

You have once again failed to produce one single iota of evidence of anybody but yourself (and the BNP) claiming a cultural implant leading to paedophilia in "all" or any British male Pakistanis.
This statement is purely your own invention and it will continue to haunt any discussion you you take part in on race and ethnicity.
Now please leave me alone and go and carry out your sordid little campaign elsewhere.
Yours
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 11:28 AM

NO Jim!
I specifically said paedophilia was not an issue.
I reported others who said that this criminality came from culture.
It was not my suggestion.
How could it?
I never claimed to know about the culture.

I thought that EVERYONE brought up in a culture is effected, to a greater or lesser extent, by that culture.
If not everyone, what proportion would you say Jim?

Meanwhile, WHICH TWO PUBS IN THE BRISTOL AREA?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 12:47 PM

Muslim Prejudice thread
13 Feb 11 - 07:10 AM
"Don I do now " believe that all male Pakistani Muslims have a culturally implanted tendency" but only because of the testimony of all those knowledgeable people, and always acknowledging that only a tiny minority succumb.
Do you dismiss all that just because it does not fit your preconceptions, or do you have some powerful evidence to the contrary that you have not shared with us?"

Best wishes
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Sep 12 - 01:27 PM

Deceit Jim.
You edited out my very first sentence!
Here it is.
"Don, no one on this thread has claimed any of those things (Muslims are all evil, oppressive, chauvinist, paedophile rapists, made so by their cultural upbringing.)"

You have the testimony of all these Mudcatters that the signs are NOT "common throughout Britain."

That false statement was made out of your bigoted prejudice against British people, who you claim are "deeply racist."
We are not.

YOU are a deceitful, dishonest, prejudiced bigot.

And, WHICH TWO PUBS IN THE BRISTOL AREA?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Sep 12 - 04:21 AM

Makes no Difference to your statement Keith
In the middle of a discussion on procuring young girls for underage sex you said:
"Don I do now " believe that all male Pakistani Muslims have a culturally implanted tendency" but only because of the testimony of all those knowledgeable people, and always acknowledging that only a tiny minority succumb.
Do you dismiss all that just because it does not fit your preconceptions, or do you have some powerful evidence to the contrary that you have not shared with us?"
I agree with you entirely when you wrote "no one on this thread has claimed any of those things....." - it has nothing whatever to do with your horrific piece of racism which implicates every male Pakistani as a suspect in the sexual abuse of children - (even the BNP couldn't top that one!)
I undertook to pass on the information you apparently appear to be clinging to in your miserable argument if you told us who your prominent people were and what they said - you have failed to do so.
Not that it makes an iota of difference - it doesn't matter who shares your belief - the fact that you believe this pack of racist garbage and would use it in a discussion on procuring underage girls for sex makes you an extreme racist anyway.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 12 Sep 12 - 04:51 AM

I'm surprised that anyone would advocate leaving 'no traveller' signs unreported, or indeed any racist signage. Particularly as the news articles I've seen, action does get taken - and swiftly - when they are. If you believe police would take no action, other routes would be to complain directly to the landlord, contact a local newspaper, contact the brewery.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Sep 12 - 05:04 AM

"An ad hominem is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or unrelated belief of the person supporting it"

I am not a racist.
The British are not deeply racist.
Those signs are not remotely common throughout Britain.
There are not two pubs in Bristol displaying those signs.

Jim is a shocking liar and a deeply prejudiced bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Sep 12 - 05:50 AM

if you told us who your prominent people were and what they said

It was that of these eminent people:-
Jack Straw, Keighley MP Ann Cryer, Mohammed Shafiq, Lord Ahmed, Jasmin Alibhai-Brown.

They all ascribed the over-representation of that group, in that crime, to aspects of the culture.
Deny that?
Culture impinges to a greater or lesser extent, on all within it.
True?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 12 Sep 12 - 12:39 PM

if you saw a sign reading "No Blacks served" or "No Asians" or "No Irish" (how this whole discussion started), would you consider it as unimportant as you seem to in regard to Travellers, and tell them to "quit whining"
Look forward to your answer with some interest.

I expect they're about as common as "No Travellers", "No Blokes Called Jim" or "No Martians" signs. I'd be quite ready to call the police on my mobile demanding action if I see Jims or Martians discriminated against too.

Are you similarly insistent that Americans take action against all those signs telling Blacks to sit at the back of the bus?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 03:02 AM

So you have finally stopped trying to defend the ludicrously indefensible Jim.
We have hundreds of Mudcatter years of never seeing one, yet you claim to have found two in less than a week.
If you want to be believed, identify the pubs so someone can discreetly check.

Re the ad hominem thing;
It was not a racist theory because the proponents had impeccable anti-racist credentials and most were Pakistanis.
Certainly not racist to just report it!
The question is not why I came to believe them, but why anyone should imagine they know better.
To be blunt, why would any sentient, rational person dismiss all those lifetimes of experience, and listen to a twat like you?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 04:05 AM

I can't believe this thread is still going. I think the main protagonists are both extrapolating from their own experiences and generalising from the particular. Neither of them can have visited every pub in the country.

Taking a broad view, I don't think these signs are common. I travel all over the UK, often visit pubs, and I don't recall ever having seen one. On the other hand, perhaps I'm not visiting the same pubs travellers do, so I wouldn't assume that my own experience reflects theirs, or that these signs categorically do not exist.

When Jim was going around with travellers he would of course be visiting those pubs most likely to have such signs, so perhaps he gained an exaggerated impression of how widespread they are.

My own view is that "No Travellers" is not a "common UK sign", but may be common in certain areas. Of course, one anywhere is too many.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 04:15 AM

"So you have finally stopped trying to defend the ludicrously indefensible Jim."
Nope - just got back from Galway hospital after having my third biopsy to see if I have prostate cancer (thank you for caring, though your quick response does leve me with the feeling of being stalked)
I should have thought even you could have worked out that I had no intention of naming the pubs which carry the signs (though it was a useful exercise in establishing that your Pakistani quote came from no-one bot yourself)
A reminder of my reply to CS
"I hope that you informed the police about the pubs you saw these signs in?
" No I didn't - I learned from bitter experience that:
A The police do not act on such reports - see my account of reporting a proposed fire bomb attack on Traveller families on Mitcham Common. B Such reports can often lead to harassment of Travellers by police and an escalation of prejudiced activity by local businesses.
And most importantly:
C The Travellers we know prefer to deal with it in their own way...."
You have a description of what can happen to Travellers who stick their heads above the parapet.
I have no intention of putting the Bristol Travellers we recorded last week in the public eye by naming the pubs in the vicinity of their site as carrying these signs (1 photographed and both archived in our recordings), certainly not to appease a goose-stepper like yourself.
The family we met (relatives of Mikeen McCarthy, who we recorded from 1975 to his death in 2004 - obituary in 2006 Folk Music Journal) fled from London following the repeal of the 1968 Caravan and camping act by the Major Govenment, and finally (after having travelled 20 years in London) managed to get a permanent site with guaranteed tenure ouside Bristol (drinking water, toilet facilities and a chance to educate their children for the first time in their lives)
They appear to get on well (or at least - unmolested) with their settled neighbours - I'm not prepared to jeapordise that to satisfy the curiosity of a racist like yourself - you have plenty of evidence of the existence of these signs, from Thatcher's pet, from the Runnymede Trust.... and plenty of other sources - I'm not surprised you don't accept hard evidence, though I am a little disappointed that some here who I've come to respect don't.
An example of what can and does happen.
We recorder some of the Travellers on the site over three days shortly before Mikeen's death.
In the evenings we would travel several miles to a pub which was the only one which would serve a group of Travellers.
Shortly after our visit, the pub changed hands and the new manager took his new broom and applied a 'no Travellers' policy.
They have now found another pub - a little further away, but....
"It was that of these eminent people:-"
And their quotes implicating "All make Pakistanis......?
All your own work Keith.
"Particularly as the news articles I've seen, action does get taken"
It seems like only yesterday you were claiming that you had no knowledge of these signs CS!!! Make up your mind lad (or lass).
If you have any doubt of the police's unswerving dedication to duty to the public, I suggest you read the Hillsborough report.
"I expect they're about as common as "No Travellers","
Little disappointed at your evasive reply to my question Jack - or maybe you wouldn't mind the dame being applied to blacks and Asians!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: wyrdolafr
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 04:16 AM

I'm still unsure as to how pubs, cinemas, restaurants &c would know anyone was a Traveller or not in the first place unless they rolled-up with a caravan/horse and cart/similar.

It's been mentioned on this thread that they *are* identifiable with regards to looks but I find that claim a bit spurious if only because whilst some talented individuals may have that knack, I very much doubt that the general population have the ability to positively identify someone in such a way. The police - who are meant to be especially discriminatory towards Travellers - certainly don't have that knack if IC codes are anything to go by. A quick google of images of Travellers show they're as diverse as the rest of us. I could pass TV 'celebrity' Travellers the street and not pick them out.

So, how exactly are they getting identified?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 04:21 AM

I sincerely wish you well with your medical troubles Jim.

No-one here would cause any trouble over those pubs if they exist.
We could circulate it by pm and be very discreet, as I said.
I think you made them up Jim, but am prepared to be proved wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 04:45 AM

"Particularly as the news articles I've seen, action does get taken"
It seems like only yesterday you were claiming that you had no knowledge of these signs CS!!! Make up your mind lad (or lass).

I commented in the other thread I'd never seen one of these "widespread" and "common" signs. Which was true. After Googling for images of such signs, I commented on this thread that I found five different image captures of such signs on the web. The five different images I found came from news stories ranging from 2003 to January of this year (ie" approximately a decade). From memory of the news stories I found about such signs, one Landlord was fired over putting up such a sign. Another sign put up in an Ice Rink was reported on and removed after five days.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 04:48 AM

"came from news stories"

Correction: Not *all* five were from news stories. I think there were a couple from other sources. One image was located on Flickr.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 04:50 AM

A footnote to all this.
Having taken part in the Dale Farm evction discussion on this forum (on the opposite side of the fence to Keith, not surprisingly) I and other members of this forum had our facebooks hacked into by another participant, sharing Keith's view, and our profiles altered - several times, eventually leading to us losing access to our accounts.
So when I am described as a 'leftie' by Keith and his ilk who, despite strenuous witchhunting efforts on the part of him and his protector, have no idea of my politics, I only have to remember from which direction the description comes from and take comfort from the fact that it's a million miles from the views I hold.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 04:54 AM

"Using health issues to cover your applauding comments against this member is beyond words."
And using my absence from this discussion to score racist points by claiming some sort of sick victory is equally beyond word.
im Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 05:10 AM

Jim, I did not argue with you about the Dale Farm evictions.
You started by making the usual unrelated accusations against me.
I made some posts about the housing problem in general.
You have misremembered, or lied again.
thread.cfm?threadid=139943#3216020

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 05:53 AM

"Jim, please return to the thread and stop the personal attacks on Keith, otherwise the thread will be closed."
These are argumants against Keith's arguments - not personal attacks
He has not provided one iota of evidence in support of his claims - his stance is based on his and others here not having seen these signs - nothing more. If this is not the case, please show what factual evidence has been produced other than this.
My view of racism in Britain is based on my own experiences and enough documented evidence to fill several libraries, the existence of two political groups in the ascendency, street demonstrations, graffitti campaigns, physical and verbal attacks on immigrants and their right to be in Britain, though they are there legally, the fact that newspapers like The Daily Mail and the Sun make race a prominent issue, the official description of the British police as "institutionally racist" following the Lawrence murder....
Now - your "factual evidence"!!
Unlike Keith - I have not claimed this to be "culturally implanted".
From earlier.
"Neither of them can have visited every pub in the country."
And neither, as far as I can see, are claiming to have done so - my argument is based on my personal experience backed with, as far as I'm concerned, enough documented evidence to make a case.
I see no such evidence here to the contrary Howard.
I apologise for my outburt earlier - I was more than a little angered that I had posted 2 messages on other threads and within minutes Keith had resurrected this thread - more than a little like being stalked
It won't happen again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 06:15 AM

Little disappointed at your evasive reply to my question Jack - or maybe you wouldn't mind the dame being applied to blacks and Asians!

Of course I'd mind (more than "mind", I'd be inclined to put a brick through the pub window if it happened).

But such signs don't exist, so I'm not going to have anything to mind about.

And there is a lot of really deadly racial discrimination against Travellers in the UK - forced eviction, job discrimination, refusal of access to decent housing and health care - which you are deliberately obscuring by your obsession with a non-issue. That kind of racism takes years off their life expectancy and makes what life they do have a misery. And rather than address that, you want to rave on about discrimination by publicans that was always rare and doesn't happen now at all?

I see you're still being evasive about American signs telling Blacks to sit at the back of the bus.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: kendall
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 06:23 AM

Those signs may not be common in Britain, but they obviously do exist because I saw one.

Blacks to the back of the bus? Not in the last 40 years.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: wyrdolafr
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 07:01 AM

Kendall, I think the issue is the definition of "common" and the idea that these signs are "common". Jim has posited that 'No Travellers' signs are "common". The counter-argument isn't that this particular kind of discrimination towards Travellers doesn't exist at all, it's just how "common" these signs actually are.

I can't find 2012 figures for how many pubs there are in the UK, but given figures for the previous decade, I'd guess-timate there's around 50,000 pubs left. But how does "common" translate as a percentage of *anything*? Is it 10%? 5%? 2%?

I'd say that 1% of anything isn't really "common", but that would mean that now, in 2012, there's a 500 pubs in the UK currently displaying 'No Travellers' signs at any one time. Whilst I accept that discrimination, sadly, does exist towards Travellers, I genuinely find these kinds of figures hard to believe.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 07:04 AM

Jim, you stated that the British are "deeply racist."
You just stated "Unlike Keith - I have not claimed this to be "culturally implanted"."

If we are a deeply rcaist people, but it does not come from our culture, you must believe that we are genetic racists.
We have a racism gene?
Please clarify Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 08:07 AM

" you must believe that we are genetic racists."
Don't you dare put such conclusions to me
Racism exists in Britain to the extent of contributing to three major riots directly attributable to insensitive policing - an establishment generated cause.
Scum like Powell gained the support of East London dockers who marched to express their agreement with his "rivers of blood" stance - a political reason
High unemployment causes dissention between racial and cultural groups - even religious ones - another political source.
Racism is a complex issue.
YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE HERE PREPARED TO CONDEMN A WHOLE GENDER OF A WHOLE ETHNIC GROUP - yes you have claimed a crime - that of procuring young women for underage sex - to be attributable to their culture and to continue to say you haven't is to continue to lie - and you have never once withdrawn your claim, only denied it.
wyrdolafr
Sorry - you can't compare it to the number of pubs, it has to be reckoned by the number of Travellers affected by it - most
The law case and legal precedent cited by Sir Angus Fraser (above) indicates it as being common enough to be significant.
"Travellers have not helped themselves in Britain"
Taking the behaviour of a small number of any cultural group to condemn all makes my point.
If you had written "Some Travellers....".... but you didn't.
"But such signs don't exist,"
The fact that you continue to avoid the fact that my examples were rhetorical seems to indicate a copping out Jack - sorry.
These signs do exist and did so in great numbers, we are arguing about whether that is still the case.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 08:14 AM

So the "establishment" has made us deeply racist?
That does not really clarify it at all Jim!

Are you saying it started with Powell?
Didn't "the establishment" throw him out of office for that speech?
Was he not attacking "the establishment" for allowing immigration?

You are spouting shite again Jim!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 08:31 AM

But such signs don't exist
The fact that you continue to avoid the fact that my examples were rhetorical seems to indicate a copping out Jack - sorry.

That's gibberish. Discrimination that only exists in rhetorical examples doesn't oppress anybody.

My example about signs telling Blacks in the US where to sit in buses was also rhetorical. Are you simply incapable of understanding the point I'm making by it?


These signs do exist and did so in great numbers, we are arguing about whether that is still the case.

It obviously is NOT the case; you're simply lying about it; and your lies are purely destructive to the cause of justice for Travellers.

If those signs had in fact existed "in great numbers" I would have HAD to have seen one in the 36 years I've lived in Britain. You're talking crap, and the effect of that rubbish is to make it look like Travellers are talking crap when they describe the oppression they suffer in the UK. But unlike you they are not talking crap, that oppression is real. So shut the fuck up and focus on some real issues for a change.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: wyrdolafr
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 08:38 AM

Jim,

"Sorry - you can't compare it to the number of pubs, it has to be reckoned by the number of Travellers affected by it - most"

Eh? Surely the definition of "common" in this sense is related to how widespread/frequent something is! Whilst a single occurrence of such a sign is one too many, I'm trying to see how statistically significant this is.

Would you say there were 500 pubs showing these signs at any one time? More? Less?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 09:16 AM

Have you seen the ad at the top of this thread?!! Any chance of getting it removed?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: kendall
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 09:35 AM

All Indians walk single file. How do I know? because I saw an Indian once and he was walking single file.

Anecdotal evidence is useless.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 10:32 AM

"Eh? Surely the definition of "common" in this sense is related to how widespread/frequent something is"
Exactly - which as nothing whatever to do with the number of pubs there are.
By your logic, putting up a 'no Travellers' sign on say, The Kings Road in Chelsea, or Knightsbridge, or Oxford Street... would be comparable to putting up one saying "beware of the crocodiles" - it would effect no-one, yet all pubs in these areas would count in your calculations

"Would you say there were 500 pubs showing these signs at any one time? More? Less?"
No idea - but I would say that I would guess that well over three quarters of the Travelling population in Britain today have been effected by this and similar discrimination - that is what I would describe as 'common'.
"Have you seen the ad at the top of this thread?!!"
Peggy and Ewan, along with Charles Parker did far more than anybody I know to raise the awareness of the problems experienced by Travellers in Britain - leave the ad where it is, it has far more relevance to this thread than many of the contributions being made here.
"Discrimination that only exists in rhetorical examples doesn't oppress anybody".
We are talking about a particular form of abuse that does exist - you have no grounds whatever to say I am lying - your own evidenced is based entirely on what you have and have not seen.
Had you said "I have spent a significant amount of time with Travellers and I know they are not being discriminated aginst i this way, you might have a point - are you saying that?
"That does not really clarify it at all Jim!"
I am not saying anything of the sort - one more time - "Racism is a complex issue and has many causes."
By the way - Powell was thrown out when his rantings became an embarrasment to his party.
The shite is all yours
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 10:38 AM

Found without effort
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_United_Kingdom
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 10:55 AM

Jim, the ad I saw was from a law firm specialising in evicting travellers.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 11:07 AM

How far do you want to take this?
Jim Carroll

Or
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-18155255
or
http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/generationemigration/2012/07/17/return-of-anti-irish-racism-in-britain/
or
http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2012/01/racism-britain
or
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jul/13/racism-football-premier-league-campbell
or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeeH7MR4q8Q
or
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/race-in-britain-2012-has-life-changed-for-ethnic-minorities-6286786.html
or
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1993597.stm

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 11:09 AM

My apologies Manitas - not on my screen - I've got the Peggy Seeger advert on mine
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 11:34 AM

Racism is a complex issue and has many causes

Many causes?
If the British people are "deeply racist" and other people are not, it REQUIRES an explanation.

Powell attacked "the establishment" and "the establishment" rejected him.
"The establishment" welcomes immigration and passes laws against every racist practice, including displaying your notices.
So, if not "the establishment" then what?
Genes?
Culture?
Clarify please Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 12:48 PM

"If the British people are "deeply racist" and other people are not, it REQUIRES an explanation.
Who on earth said other people are not? I have no experience of other people's racism - it isn't an issue here.
I am talking of my own experiences and my own knowledge of racist Britain.
I have made a few suggestions, but have mentioned neither culture or genes; you are the only one to make such sweeping racist generalisation - are you really incapable of addressing a question honestly?
"Powell attacked "the establishment" and "the establishment" rejected him."
Powel did not attack the establishment - he was part of the establishment and had many supporters from that establishment - he was forced out when he became an electoral liability - there has been a somewhat splendid documentary on him on the BBC within the last 6 months.
Ironically, he found a spiritual home in sectarian Northern Ireland.
You have a whole load of examples of British racism - address them.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 01:01 PM

The British are "deeply racist" compared to who then?
We know that discrimination against Travellers is worse in Ireland so they are presumably more deeply racist still.
If we are not more racist than others, what was your point in desribing the British as "deeply racist"?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 01:06 PM

I think it would be realistic to refer to ALL cultures as racist to some degree or another, it's biology. However I think that mainstream British culture is LESS racist than most other cultures in the world. Travellers and Irish people are also racist of course.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 01:07 PM

"The British are "deeply racist" compared to who then?"
Why do I need to compare - it stands as a statement on its own?
You appear to be now reduced to gibberish.
"We are not as racist as...." whoever, is a dishonest cop out
And you still have to address the links put up - I can't find one comparison among them
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 01:36 PM

"I think it would be realistic to refer to ALL cultures as racist to some degree or another"
Not sure you're right CS, but I don't know enough about the subject to contradict.
It is necessary to remember that human beings are thinking creatures capable of making choices beyond the instinct to survive.
Racism is an 'issue' in Britain and is escalating.
If we can't learn the lessons from the last century we really are no better than animals.
You canalways find someone somewhere more racist than Britain, Ireland, Germany American..... it is no defence for our own behaviour.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 01:54 PM

"Racism is an 'issue' in Britain and is escalating."

I think it is in a *minority* of people. And I would include other cultures apart from 'white British' in that. Racial conflicts are an issue between a variety of immigrant communities also here in the UK. And those conflicts are founded on racist attitudes about others, just as much as any indigenous white attitudes may also be.
On the other hand, I would argue that bar the rise of some extremism, mainstream British culture has in fact become *less* racist than it has been in the past.
No more would we see a 'Marigold' on Alf Garnett. No More Jim Davidson jokes about 'dee bluck maan smokeen dee gaunjaah'. My grandfather's generation of bigots has died out. Racism remains, but it's not an overt aspect of mainstream British culture any longer. It's no longer tolerated bar in ever smaller circles.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,sturgeon
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 02:00 PM

CS, I think you should read this.

10 Myths of the UK's Far Right

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 02:10 PM

Sturgeon, I've followed the misadventures of the BNP with interest over the last couple of years. But I think this quote from the first sentence of that article sums up the point I was making:

"Nick Griffin's project has failed"

Yes, extremism exists in the UK, but not on the scale scaremongers would wish us to believe.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 02:24 PM

Jim, you seem to be claiming that the British are deeply racist, but you have no idea how they compare to others.
As far as you know we could be the least racist people in the world.
I suspect we may indeed be among the least racist in the world.

Less racist than Ireland in view of their treatment of Travellers.
Less racist than France with its deportations of Roma and restrictions on Muslim dress.

So we are deeply racist, but everyone else is deeply, deeply, deeply, racist?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 02:24 PM

How are you managing to get round the links I put up CS? That is only page one of the search - there are plenty more where that came from.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 02:40 PM

"How are you managing to get round the links I put up CS?"

I didn't get around anything Jim. I acknowledged that racism exists in the UK, and in diverse forms among diverse communities, and particularly so among extremists. I argued that it is however no longer an acceptable aspect of *mainstream British culture* in the way that it commonly was twenty or thirty years ago. Here's a longer quote from that link Sturgeon recommended to me:

"Nick Griffin's project has failed – but support for the BNP remains. The party never shook off its associations with neo-nazism and violence, and thanks in part to one of the largest anti-fascist mobilisations this country has ever seen, its support did not spread far beyond a hard core of voters."

Note that Jim: it was thanks to "One of the largest anti-fascist mobilisations this country has ever seen" that "Griffin's project .. failed" to excite the supposedly 'deeply racist' passions of the British public. One of the largest anti-fascist mobilisations this country has ever seen.. Think on!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Sep 12 - 03:23 PM

If it was a question of "extremists" it would be understandable (though not acceptasble) - I don't think I met many of them during my working life, but the frightening thing I found was that people who expressed racist sentiment were otherwise ordinary, easy going men and women who I would have happily spent time with socially - as long as the subject of race never came up.
To my shame, I learned to avoid such topics - for the sake of peace and quiet.
I'm sure I could happily have enjoyed a pint with many of the dockers who marched in support of Powell - as long as nobody mentioned immigration.
I was watching a film-clip recently from the Notting Hill race riots (part of the excellent London Babylon); the horrifying thing about it - no swastikas, no flags or armbands, no fascist salutes - just ordinary men and women venting their fury against 'the blacks'.
Ireland has its share of racists I am sure, but it doesn't have a race problem - not one that shows itself publicly anyway.
The most vituperative racists I have met here are those who have lived in the US or Britain.
The Achilles heel of course is the attitude to Travellers; a far worse record than Britain's with not even a pretence of an attempt to solve the problem.
It is to be hoped that Martin Collins' organisation manages to make some headway, otherwise I fear the worst.
I would recommend again the book(let) 'The Gypsy and the State' The ethnic cleansing of British Society - a chilling read
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 04:07 AM

The Achilles heel of course is the attitude to Travellers; a far worse record than Britain's with not even a pretence of an attempt to solve the problem.

An honest acceptance of that issue.
Thanks Jim.
As Travellers are the only ethnic group in significant numbers in Ireland, it is not surprising that racism against other groups is not encountered very often.

Your accusation of the British being deeply racist was unfair, unjustified, and indicative of your dislike of us.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 05:10 AM

""I was watching a film-clip recently from the Notting Hill race riots (part of the excellent London Babylon); the horrifying thing about it - no swastikas, no flags or armbands, no fascist salutes - just ordinary men and women venting their fury against 'the blacks'.""

A nicely chosen destruction of your own argument!

I was fifteen when those "riots" happened and living at 287 Ladbroke Grove, which was slap bang in the middle of the Notting Hill area, and it was predominantly gang warfare between Teddy Boys and black youths, not ordinary men and women.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 05:15 AM

Correction!

I was seventeen in 1958. There had been incidents beteen Teds and black lads for at least two years before that boiled over, but that was a different world than we have today.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 05:44 AM

Not still arguing!!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 06:17 AM

"and it was predominantly gang warfare between Teddy Boys and black youths, not ordinary men and women.
I bow to your experience Don - I wasn't in London at the time and can only judge what I saw on a 10 second film clip - the people involved looked ordinary enough to me.
Which in no way impinges on everything else I wrote - the racists I met while working in London, Manchester and Liverpool were otherwise decent working men and women - and you can't get more 'ordinary' than the East End dockers who marched in support of Enoch's 'Rivers of Blood' ranting.
Maybe you remember the Kings Cross colour bar strike of railwaymen; railway worker Charlie Mayo even wrote a song about it.
"As Travellers are the only ethnic group in significant numbers in Ireland"
A beautiful example of your total ignorance of Ireland
The Republic is part of Europe - we have far more Poles, Lithuanians and other Eastern Europeans than we do Travellers.
Most sizeable town in Ireland have shops that cater almost exclusively for Eastern Europeans.
When we moved here a dozen years ago we commented at how we missed seeing black people on the street - now it is uncommon to go to our market town wihout seeing Africans, West Indians, Asians.....
Gort, a town between here and Galway has an extremely large population of Brazilians who moved to Ireland a dozen or so years ago when a canning factory owned by a Gort man closed in Brazil.
They are at this moment holding a ceremony in Dublin welcoming 2250 new Irish citizens from abroad.
http://www.thejournal.ie/more-than-2250-new-irish-citizens-welcomed-to-the-national-family-344873-Feb2012/
Travellers are very much in the minority here - get your facts right!!!
"and indicative of your dislike of us."
This is an ongoing racist statement from you - how many generations does my family have to have lived here before you accept me as British? I was born there, as were both my parents, my grandparents on both sides, my great grandparents....
For me to "hate" Britons would be to accuse me of self-hate
I do not hate the British but I do hate the circumstances, the politicians, the gutter media, the social insecurity, scum like the BNP, and those who would actively denigrate people of different races, colours, religions, all of whom have planted the seed of racism into the minds of many otherwise good and decent people - that is who I reserve my hatred for.
You continue to deliberately misrepresent my case - you have the links - read them and answer them.
Incidently, if you are to be believed, Britain is racist enough to have an ex home secretary who has openly made a racist attack on "all male Pakistanis in Britain", describing them as having a cultural implanted tendency towards procuring underage girls for sex.
You have consistently claimed Jack Straw as one of your inspirations for your holding this opinion.
If this is true, not only has he continued to hold a prominent position in Parliament, in opposition, but he has been allowed to break the law by making such a statement. He has made a racially inflamatory statement and has gone unpunished for doing so.
IT IS A BLATENTLY RACIST STATEMENT AND AS SUCH, IT IS AGAINST THE LAW WHY HASN'T HE BEEN PROSECUTED - AND WHY HAVEN'T THE OTHERS YOU HAVE CONTINUALLY CLAIMED INSPIRED YOU BEEN PROSECUTED WITH HIM??
Answers on a plain postcard will really not do for this one!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,CS
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 06:40 AM

ASIDE:

Not a comment on the content of your last post Jim, just the RED font you use quite frequently.

It's not easy on the eye at all. I'd suggest that bolding and/or italics might be preferable (for readers) to RED CAPS if you want to highlight certain portions? Because I'm finding I'm skimming over them.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: goatfell
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 06:43 AM

I haven't seen one either and I'm from Scotland

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 06:59 AM

Thanks CS - will try
"I haven't seen one either and I'm from Scotland "
Sheila and Belle Stewart saw plenty maybe they were making it up
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 07:56 AM

The majority of the babies born in London last year were to mums born abroad.
Dublin does not come close.
We have had the equivalent of a new Manchester every year for years now.
Some social tensions are inevitable.
There is a huge crisis of homelessness, and overwhelmed services.
It is extraordinary how little animosity there has been.
Few countries could achieve that.
The biggest problem is tensions between different groups of newcomers.

The treatment of Travellers allows a comparison of tolerance in Ireland and Britain, and we win.
That is why it is so provacative to have someone based in Ireland attack us and call us "deeply racist."

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 08:20 AM

my recollection of the notting hill riots, i living in london and seven years old at the time, was that Mosley was involved in flaming the situation, i remember my parents talking about it at the time, in fasct my elder brother was not allowed to wear a black t shirt my parents were concerned this might be mistaken for being a black shirt, this was the time of the notting hill riots

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 08:24 AM

Oswald Mosley

A Notting Hill resident recounts his story of fighting racists and fascists in West London.

"Mosley tried to stir up a conflict between the blacks and the whites because his aim was to drive the blacks frorn North Kensington, to drive them from the shores of England. I wasn't for that because I came here to fight for the mother country... Mosley was stirring up a hate campaign, his supporters, the Teddy boys running around with bicycle chains and 'Keep Britain White, Keep Britain White'. They were going around in groups seeking out a coloured and beating him up, fighting, repressing coloured man or coloured woman, they go round kicking them about and beating them up.

Well, black people were so frightened at that time that they wouldn't leave their houses, they wouldn't come out, they wouldn't walk the streets of Portobello Road. So we decided to form a defence force to fight against that type of behaviour and we did. We organized a force to take home coloured people wherever they were living in the area. We were not leaving our homes and going out attacking anyone, but if you attack our homes you would be met, that was the type of defence force we had. We were warned when they were coming and we had a posse to guard our headquarters.

When they told us that they were coming to attack that night I went around and told all the people that was living in the area to withdraw that night. The women I told them to keep pots, kettles of hot water boiling, get some caustic soda and if anyone tried to break down the door and come in, to just lash out with them. The men, well we were armed. During the day they went out and got milk bottles, got what they could find and got the ingredients of making the Molotov cocktail bombs. Make no mistake, there were iron bars, there were machetes, there were all kinds of arms, weapons, we had guns.

We made preparations at the headquarters for the attack. We had men on the housetop waiting for them, I was standing on the second floor with the lights out as look-out when I saw a massive lot of people out there. I was observing the behaviour of the crowd outside from behind the curtains upstairs and they say, 'Let's burn the niggers, let's lynch the niggers.' That's the time I gave the order for the gates to open and throw them back to where they were coming from. I was an ex-serviceman, I knew guerrilla warfare, I knew all about their game and it was very, very effective.

I says, 'Start bombing them.' When they saw the Molotov cocktails coming and they start to panic and run. It was a very serious bit of fighting that night, we were determined to use any means, any weapon, anything at our disposal for our freedom. We were not prepared to go down like dying dogs. But it did work, we gave Sir Oswald Mosley and his Teddy boys such a whipping they never come back in Notting Hill. I knew one thing, the following morning we walked the streets free because they knew we were not going to stand for that type of behaviour."

Baker Baron, born in 1925 in Port Antonia, Jamaica, had three brothers and a sister. Their father was a wharf official. Baron joined the Royal Air Force when he was fifteen by telling them that he was a year older. in 1944, after serving in the RAF for four years, he arrived in Britain and settled in London where he got a job working as a labourer on the railways. In 1958 at the time of the riots Baron was living in Notting Hill where he was involved in anti-fascist activities and in the campaign for better housing for the West Indian community. He still lives in West London.
don thompson, your recollections are quite different from this guys and mine, likewise you are way off beam, with your statement[elsewhere] that the guildford bombers were not innocent, nothing personal Ithink you are a nice guy , but you are getting certain historical facts wrong

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 08:47 AM

Last year was the 50th anniversary of the Notting Hill Race riots. CS member John Sidwell wrote this article examining some of the issues
The riots that broke out in Notting Hill, 1958 marked the first major race riot in Britain post-mass immigration. It spanned five nights over the August Bank holiday, sparked by the bating of a mixed race couple by a gang of white youths. That such a minor event escalated in the manner it did was testament to working-class racial divisions.
However, explanation's that go no deeper than race fail to understand the riots underlying dynamics. The state played a key role in fostering the antipathy. It presided over the deprivation of working-class communities that allowed Oswald Mosley and his fascist Union Movement to galvanise support for its racist, anti-immigration stance.
State repression during and after the riots ensued, often targeted at Caribbean immigrants despite clear evidence that whites had orchestrated the riots.
The riots are these days often touted as a vital stepping stone on the path to a multicultural Britain. However, the experience of a multicultural Britain has in no way put an end to 'race riots'. In fact the establishment's multicultural agenda intensifies working-class division. In contrast communists must uphold working-class unity.

Windrush

Emerging from the Second World War Britain faced a labour shortage. The extensive welfare plans of the Labour government had opened up new avenues of employment. War casualties had however diminished the British labour force.
This situation prompted a considerable wave of Caribbean immigrants. Upon arrival there was immediate hostility, and several Members of Parliament voiced their concerns. Despite this there was no widespread bourgeois opposition. They saw the immigrants as vital statistics in the face of a depleted work force. Skin colour was, for them, of secondary importance.
For even the most realistic of voyagers, arrival to a London slum was likely to prove a disappointment. Many landlords simply rejected to house Caribbean's. Faced with such conditions they were forced to accept whatever they could get. They therefore increasingly became concentrated in the most deprived areas of the city, where "anti-social" landlords presided over vast, decaying estates.1
The housing problem, whilst specifically intense for the Caribbean population, was by no means exclusive to them. Working-class communities in general, had been inadequately catered for. Thus there existed competition for housing, even of such a terrible standard. Such competition was to flare up conflict, divided on racial grounds, prior to 1958.
Discrimination against the Caribbean immigrants was also present amongst employers. In times when work was abundant this often meant Caribbean's filling the jobs with the worst conditions, and lowest pay. When unemployment rose, Caribbean's were often the first to loose their jobs. In such a manner, the immigrant workers were demarked from their white counterparts. They came to represent an underclass within the class.
Ten years on from the first boat of Caribbean immigrants in 1948, the post-war boom hit a lull. Accordingly unemployment rates rose. The states failure to provide employment and adequate housing met with increasing discontent. In looking for answers many whites became convinced the problem had stemmed from immigration.
Active in stirring up such feelings were Oswald Mosley, and his fascist Union Movement. Mosley had made immigration the primary focus of his campaigning. Rather than highlighting the inadequacy of the bourgeois state in meeting the needs of the working-classes, Mosley made a scapegoat of the Caribbean immigrants. They were targeted for 'stealing' white's jobs and housing. Cultural differences were also played up; attacking Caribbean's for failing to assimilate into a 'British way of life'. Such conclusion attained support from sections of the white working-class. The most visible symbol of change in their neighbourhoods had been the influx of Caribbean's. In such a way the fascists were able to exploit common, working-class deprivation, and split the class on racial grounds.
This is not to say that the Union Movement was inundated with new members. The North Kensington (containing Notting Hill) election the year following the riots saw Mosley finish last, achieving eight percent (3,000 votes). However, there involvement in the Notting Hill riots was central. It was preceded by a Mosley rally designed to whip up racial tensions. The "Keep Britain White" graffiti that adorned the Notting Hill streets was reportedly the product of Union fascists, not local Teddy Boys'.2 The two were certainly not the same thing, as some accounts appear to claim. It would be wrong however to consider this equivalent to a claim that the rioters were all steadfast fascists. The majority were not.

"Teds" & Reds

At the time the Metropolitan Police dismissed the riots as the work of "ruffians, both coloured and white". Unsurprisingly, this was nonsense. Such portrayals of the riots have been debunked, contradicted by recently revealed Police eye-witness reports' sighting white's as the aggressor (Alan Travis 'After 44 year's secret papers reveal truth about five nights of violence in Notting Hill' Guardian 24 August 2002).
The response of the press was to pin the blame entirely on working-class Teddy Boys'. An appraisal of the riots still largely upheld in the bourgeois press today.3 The Teds were depicted as a homogenous mass of racist workers. The reality was quite different. In fact there were even communist Teds.
The most appropriate comparison to a social grouping today would be with 'hoods'. Both consistently demonised in the press, and considered, in their entirety, as variants on the stereotypical yob. Both too represent elements of working-class youth, disregarded by the state.
The fact that you are likely to find many more racist 'hoods', as was the case with Teds, than communist or socialist ones is a failing of the left. The official policy of the CPGB toward immigration opposed any restrictions. The experience of the party for many Caribbean immigrants was however quite different. Accounts suggest racism was rife in the CPGB (Marika Sherwood Claudia Jones: A Life in Exile London 1999). Validity to such a claim is boosted by the failure of the CPGB to attract any significant backing from the immigrant population. This was despite the fact that many had been members of their respective communist parties prior to immigration.
Thus the largest grouping of the far-left clearly failed to seriously challenge the fascists. Rather than offering a clear, independent alternative of working-class unity the CPGB aped bourgeois attitudes to race.
An assessment of the attitude toward race expressed today by the SWP, along with the majority of the far-left, has some resonance with this. Whilst obviously they are not racist, their position still tails that of the establishment. Their anti-fascist front Unite Against Fascism consists of an alliance with bourgeois anti-fascists from all the major parties. The message this delivers is problematic. This subordination to the bourgeois agenda on anti-fascism effectively reinforces their legitimacy over far-right groups, ignoring the fact that it is the very rule of such parties that create the conditions under which support for the far-right can flourish. It should go without saying; latching on to sections of the bourgeoisie cannot help develop a serious working-class threat to the current system.
A party consistently representing the interests of the working-class was a factor sorely missed in the events of 1958. Without such a challenge the fascists were given free rain to propagate their hate.
The actual clashes constituting the riots began on 30 August, and raged until 5 September. The Caribbean population organised self-defence "hit squads" in the face of the threat. These "squads" were often more brutally targeted by the Police than white rioters.
Racism was substantially entrenched throughout the state-apparatus, but the police were considered to be amongst the worst. Despite clear evidence that whites had orchestrated the riots, of the 108 charged, 36 were "coloured".4
Guardian­ columnist Alan Travis claims the treatment of Caribbean's during the riots "ensured a legacy of black mistrust of the Metropolitan police that has never really been eradicated" ('After 44 year's secret papers reveal truth about five nights of violence in Notting Hill' Guardian 24 August 2002). Such events have intensified black hatred toward the police to a greater extent than many whites, but the antagonism is more fundamentally rooted than that.
The police represent the street-level enforcers of bourgeois state rule; a rule that had seen Caribbean's subjugated, even below other sections of the working-class. In fact, the white rioters also expressed substantial hostility to the police. The root was not in poor treatment at one particular time or another, but in the disenfranchisement of both black and white workers endemic in a capitalist system. It is hardly surprising that those most exploited by capitalism often express the sharpest hostility towards its police force.
Police hostility toward the Caribbean's was echoed in many parliamentary quarters. George Rogers, Labour MP for North Kensington, pinned blame on the immigrants for failure to assimilate. A declaration fascist's heralded as his conversion to their cause.
Despite such a soft response from elements of the bourgeois establishment, the riots were also exploited as a means to tighten state control. The sentencing of nine white youth to a punishment of four years, to act as a deterrent, passed into judicial lore as an example of "exemplary sentencing".5
Communists oppose any extension of bourgeois state power, even when enforced against the far-right. Laws and restrictions imposed on fascists can and will be utilised just as forcefully, if not more so, against the far-left when it rears its head in defiance.

Carnival

Caribbean resistance against both racism and dismal living conditions continued after the riots. The anarchist Tommy Farr established the Organisation for the Protection of Coloured People, the first hit squad to attack the Mosleyite's. He later organised the first tenants housing committee in the Notting Hill slums which achieved housing repairs following a rent strike.
The Notting Hill Carnival was also established in response to the riots. Its original aims were to bring together West Indian immigrants with local working-class whites. Part of its proceeds went to "assist the payment of fines of coloured and white youths involved in the Notting Hill events" (Marika Sherwood Claudia Jones: A Life in Exile London 1999).
Instrumental in its organisation was Caribbean communist Claudia Jones. Raised in New York, Jones was deported from America having spent a year in jail on charges of advocating the violent overthrow of the US government. Arriving in Britain, she entered the CPGB, but found herself constantly constrained by a hostile leadership.
Arising out of such conditions, and with such figures at the helm, it is little surprise the establishment has, in the past, had such a problem with the Carnival. Heavy police presence at the Carnival had been a continual fixture since its incarnation.
The most obvious example was the 1976 Notting Hill Carnival Riots, where the police met with resistance following "arbitrary harassments and arrests" of young blacks attending the carnival. Rioting proved fiercer than in 1958.6
As of 1989 however, the role of appointing those who organise the Carnival was wrestled from local community organisations. It is now in the hands of the state to appoint those who run the Carnival.
In tandem with maximum police deployment, this ascertaining of control has enabled the state to further bludgeon the resistive element of the Carnival. One would hope Claudia Jones would be most displeased at the soft multiculturalism the Carnival represents today.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 08:50 AM

"and we win."
It's not a game
"Dublin does not come close".
Nor is it a subject for comparison, every nation has to answer for its own failings and not hide behind the failings of others.
What you have put are random excuses for something that you claim does not exist.
The links that you - yet again - have not had the bottle to refer to, so I can safely assume you are writing them off once again as made up by "agenda ridden spokespersons trying to justify their pay-packets"
show beyond doubt that Britain has a race problem.
You have not had the good grace to acknowledge your enormous schoolboy howler on Ireland's immigrant population - nor did I expect you to - you're not that sort of guy!!
You have totally ignored the idiocy of your Jack Staw claim - your opinion or the criminals you have so far attributed them to - the world has a right to be told??
Please shut the door as you leave.
Oh, and your posting is the old usual BNP generated anti-immigrant shite - please check out Sturgeon's 10 Myths of the UK's Far Right link - I'm sure you haven't so far.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 08:54 AM

Can I ask a question, Jim? Do you genuinely believe that the people of London, Manchester and Liverpool are any more racist than anyone else? If so, can you not see that by tarring everyone of the those cities with the same brush you are falling into exactly the same trap that those racists you obviouslt despise. And if that is the case I must take exception with you. I live in Salford. I am not a racist. I know racists. I know an awful lot more who are not.

To repeat what I said before

Travellers are thieves
Blacks men are rapists
Jews are shysters
The British are racist

Which of the above statements is acceptable? You tell me.

Oh, and going back to the main thread, there are far more people, inclusing me, who have not seen these signs although I have no doubt that they exist. I do not believe that they are at all common. Can you quantify what commin is> In every pub window? Half? A quarter? 10%? 1%? Again, please let us know what you mean by common.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 09:27 AM

There is no idiocy about Jack Straw, except yours Jim.

Ireland does not have a significant immigrant population compared to Britain, so comparison is not possible.
We can compare tolerance of Travellers, and Ireland is much less tolerant than Britain, so it ill behoves you to criticise British tolerance from a less tolerant place.

Goatfell, thank you for your input.
I am sorry that Jim dismissed you and implied that you were lying.
You have been here much longer than he has, and I would trust your word over his any day.

Don T, you have close relations in the police I recall.
What is your experience of how common these signs are, and the accusation that our racist police ignore them?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 11:21 AM

"Do you genuinely believe that the people of London, Manchester and Liverpool are any more racist than anyone else?"
Have I suggested they are Dave?
Those are the three cities I have lived in and witnessed racism firsthand.
"it ill behoves you to criticise British tolerance from a less tolerant place."
Only when it comes to Travellers - as far as the ewelcoming of other ethnic groups are concerned Ireland is streets ahead of Britain.
If I were using that fact to defend racism, as is being done by Keith here, you might have a point, but I am not, so you don't.
All racism is evil and each country must take responsibility for its own and not hide behind that of others.
"The British are racist"
Please ton't descend to Keith's level of argument - I have not made such a claim - I have said that Britain is a deeply racist country and the links I have provided go some way to proving that I am not alone in tha belief - perhaps you would like to comment on them - Keith has yet to.
"In every pub window.......?"
As I said Dave, no idea. I can only guess that well over three quarters of the Travelling population have been affected by such discrimination, which is the only figure that counts as far as I'm concerned.
"There is no idiocy about Jack Straw, except yours Jim."
This is empty rhetoric which in no way addresses the fact that you have painted yourself into a corner - Either Straw, Keighley Cryer, Mohammed Shafiq, Ahmed an Alibhai-Brown are unpunished criminals or you are a liar - unless you can think of an alternative. Maybe you were safer claiming tyou didn't say it - don'tcha think?
"I am sorry that Jim dismissed you and implied that you were lying.
"
No I didn't, once again it is you distorting what I said, which was Sheila and Belle experienced it.
I have no doubt whatever that Goatfell has never seen the signs if he says so, but if he is using that fact to claim that they don't exist, it is he who is accusing me of lying.
I have grown more than a little tired of a bunch of people who have never been near a Traveller for any significant length of time (I'm sure if they had I would have known about it long before now) implying that I am lying or actually accusing me of doing so.
I saw what I saw, I was involved in the campaign I said I was involved in, and Travellers have directly occupied a major part of my life for over thirty years. As far as transcriing, indexing and archiving the material we collected from them, it still does, and will continue to do so for the rest of my life.
People can either take me at my word or G.F.T. as far as I'm concerned.
"You have been here much longer than he has, and I would trust your word over his any day."
Much like my predecessors living in Britain - doncha think.
Don't know whether it ever made it out of Liverpool, but we used to call the Uriah Heep soundalike you are indulging in 'suckholing' when I was young.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 12:30 PM

Jim, no-one is questioning your work and friendships with the Traveller community, but you can not tell us who live here that " "No Travellers" signs are common throughout Britain."
We can see for ourselves perfectly well that they are not.
Most of us have never seen one at all.
We all KNOW that YOU ARE WRONG and do not need to follow your links.
We know!

Ireland does not have a significant immigrant population compared to Britain, so comparison is not possible.
We can compare tolerance of Travellers, and Ireland is much less tolerant than Britain, so it ill behoves you to criticise British tolerance from a less tolerant place.

Straw and the others blamed aspects of the culture for the excess of a certain criminality.
That is not racist.
Only you think it is Jim.
Of course they have not been locked up!
No culture is above criticism, and that community, good decent people as the great majority are, have accepted that criticism.

In the 50s and 60s, whites in the Southern States were deeply racist, because they were raised in a racist culture.
It is OK to say that.

Many rose above it, but culture is where it came from.
Changing that culture has been a long slow process, but things are much better now.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 01:04 PM

this is ridiculous, there is prejudice against travelers in both ireland and england

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 01:29 PM

"but you can not tell us who live here that " "No Travellers" signs are common throughout Britain."
Will you stop this racist bollocks - you have no idea what is copmmon in Britain - you appere nebver to have met a Traveller otherwise you would be crowing from the roof, my latest information is directly from the victims of this abuse living in Bristol but Travelling all over the southern part of England and with a very effective grapevine for passing on information - as anybody who has had any dealing with Travellers is more than aware of.
Your "we in Britain" is little Englander garbage.
"We know!"
You may want to believe but in fact you know s.f.a.
"Ireland does not have a significant immigrant population compared to Britain"
Nobody claimed that it did - your comparison was between Travellers in Ireland and immigrants there - you are one of the most dishonest people I have had the displeasure to argue with
"Straw and the others blamed aspects of the culture for the excess of a certain criminality."
You claimed that Straw implicated all male Pakistani Muslims by having a culturally implanted tendency causing them to procure underage women for sex - that was your statement and you blamed it on others in a despicably cowardly fashion. If they said it they were criminals, if they didn't you have lied constently over 18 months - which is it?
You now appear to be attempting to adapt your line.
Not only have you lied, but you lack the bottle to stand by your own beliefs
Go away
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 01:32 PM

One more time - produce one single quote from your claimed sources which in any way implicates "all male Pakistanis" in anything because of a cultural implant
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 02:48 PM

I thinkyou should leave Jim alone - he's been ill and he gets too worked up. It can't be good for him.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 02:49 PM

One more time.
They all ascribed the slight excess in a certain criminality to aspects of the culture.
Deny that Jim?

Everyone brought up within a culture is effected to a greater or lesser extent by that culture.
Agree Jim?
If not, what proportion are effected?

The signs ARE NOT COMMON THROUGHOUT BRITAIN.
THAT IS A FACT JIM.
You pontificating from across the sea about this country does not change what the actual situation is here.
We all KNOW that the signs are not common Jim.
You were wrong about that, and you are making a complete ARSE of yourself over it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 03:13 PM

"The signs ARE NOT COMMON THROUGHOUT BRITAIN. THAT IS A FACT JIM."
Evidence? You have produced not one single shred of it so far, nor has anybody else her - if they have, point it out.
"They all ascribed the slight excess in a certain criminality to aspects of the culture"
No they didn't - how on earth could they have ascribed any type of criminality to "ALL MALE PAKISTANIS IN BRITAIN" are you insane? - if they did they are racist - produce yor quotes or stand proved as a liar.
"You pontificating from across the sea "
You are now coming over as a Little Englander caricature.
"and you are making a complete ARSE of yourself over it. "
I look forward with some interest to the evidence you are about to produce
Jim carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 03:50 PM

Evidence? You have produced not one single shred of it so far, nor has anybody else her - if they have, point it out.
This thread is a survey of a random cross section of British Mudcatters.
Most have never seen a sign in their lives.
We ALL agree they must be as rare as rocking-horse shit if they exist at all.

how on earth could they have ascribed any type of criminality to "ALL MALE PAKISTANIS IN BRITAIN"
They did not.
There was an over-representation in one specific crime, which they ascribed to aspects of culture.
Specifically attitudes to women in general and white girls in particular, and some linked in the practise of arranged marriages to first cousins from Pakistan.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 04:16 PM

"This thread is a survey of a random cross section of British Mudcatters."
And has been participated in by - what - a dozen contributors who have based their conclusions on not having seen the signs.
None have referred to any of the reports put up, including one by Thatcher's adviser nor The survey commissioned by the Runnymede Trust - neither o whom have the incentive to lie - on the contrary - the Thatcher regime was not renowned for its support of racial minorities.
No-one has claimed personal experience with Travellers
No proof whatever, just "I've never seen one".
"They did not."
But you did, and you claimed they did - you really don't want me to drag out your quotes doing so, do you?
You lied and you have just admitted it.
Piss of
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 04:55 PM

participated in by - what - a dozen contributors who have based their conclusions on not having seen the signs.

Yes.

None have referred to any of the reports put up
No.
We just refer to the signs that none of us see, because they are not common throughout Britain.
Sorry Jim, but they really are not.

Leave it Jim.
It is hardly a big issue.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Sep 12 - 06:34 PM

""I bow to your experience Don - I wasn't in London at the time and can only judge what I saw on a 10 second film clip - the people involved looked ordinary enough to me.""

It only takes about 30 seconds to google "race riots", and there it is Jim.

I share your contempt for the racist extremists in this country, but take issue with the rest of your statement.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 03:44 AM

"It is hardly a big issue. "
Not to you obviously, but then again, your stance on race is hardly a recommendation.
To repeat that these signs are not common in Britain as a mantra without ONE SINGLE SHRED OF PROOF, AND TO CONTINUE TO IGNORE - EVEN WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, proof to the contrary, is enough of an indication to me that they are common enough.
I've seen them (last time on Saturday-week in Somerset), I've been assured by some of the victims that they, and other forms of racist exclusion are still very much alive and kicking, I saw them in their hundreds throughout the time I worked with Travellers, I've read the reports that still prove them to be around (even from those who would not be consideed to be sympathetic to ethnic minorities).
The fact that you put so much effort into threads like this sums it all up really.
Another piece for you to ignore from a 2009 study of Traveller conditions in Britain today - racism not a problem in Britain - yeah, right!!!.
Jim Carroll

"To choose, fix, or ignore culture? The cultural politics of Gypsy and Traveler mobility in England
Peter Kabachnik

Studies show that Gypsies and Travellers have poor access to education and health services and have high unemployment rates (Clark and Greenfields 2006). Conditions at unauthorized caravan sites and, indeed, some official local council sites are appalling, with no garbage disposal, no sewers or plumbing, no fresh water, and no electricity and phone services. The sites are often located in industrial areas or near garbage dumps. The media is saturated with negative and sensationalized images of such sites. Repeated opinion polls show that Gypsies are the least liked minority group. Racism is pervasive towards nomads, from individual acts of representation and hate speech and 'No Gypsy/ Traveller' signs adorning pubs, to violent hate crimes, both symbolic and actual, as well as the structural and insti¬tutional varieties of discrimination.
While the predictions of the inevitable, and always imminent, disappearance of nomadic ways of life have repeatedly proven premature, the brutal history and difficult contemporary circumstances leads many sympathetic obser¬vers   to ask: Why go on living such an oppressed way of life? Why not give up nomadism and its corresponding struggle, and turn in your caravan for a nice 'regular' house or apartment? These queries are some¬times offered not out of malice, but with a sincere concern for their well-being.
Irrespective of the intention, by imploring nomads to change their way of life—for their own good—it is suggested that all that is required for Gypsies and Travellers is to simply choose. Why is the nomadic way of life so casually and effortlessly deemed a choice? Furthermore, is this the proper way to frame this debate—are Gypsies and Travellers stubbom and backward, preventing themselves from the benefits of a more settled, and hence civilized, way of life by hanging on to nomadism? Or alternatively, is this particular cukuraliit discourse a way of denying the distinctive and legitimate way of life of certain British Gypsies and Irish Travellers who continue to practice a nomadic way of life?
This 'culture as choice' rhetoric, though common, has not been very successful in making Gypsies and Travellers disappear, though it has surely helped to maintain high levels of intolerance. Interestingly, this 'culture as choice' idea is failing, in part, due to its collision with another cultural discourse. Here the opposite idea is imposed. Gypsies and Travellers cannot stop practicing nomadism since that is what they are—nomads! The 'culture as nature' argument, an example of an essentialist cultural theory, makes the term 'sedentary Gypsy or Traveller' an oxy¬moron. It is this idea that at the same time enables predictions of the extinction of their culture, as once nomadism ends, so too do Gypsies and Travellers."

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 04:00 AM

If they were common, we would see them Jim.
We do not, so they can not be common.
If you saw two in Somerset last week, tell us where.

They are not common for the reason given.
The British are not "deeply racist" and Ireland is less tolerant as shown by its treatment of Travellers.

Don.

I share your contempt for the racist extremists in this country
We are all with Jim on that, and not just the extremists and not just in this country.
but take issue with the rest of your statement.
Which?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 04:02 AM

And still. Nobody seems to want to ask why travellers on the whole, just as any group, are negatively stereotyped in the first place?

If you want to be accepted by society you need to be part of society. The signs referred to, very rare, rather historical and I suspect having hens teeth status in Bristol, are not nice, rather repugnant hence not used these days, and borne of ignorance.

However, and as bad as it can sound, if we invest in public health programs to protect the population, then it can only work if all people buy into it. In the meantime, TB and measles are clustering in traveller groups. Bare hard facts and if not dealt with soon, such signs may become real again rather than in the minds of those who don't even live here.

I'm happy of course to accept the coincidence of my old factory unit being broken into whilst ever there was a camp at the end of the industrial estate.

Sorry, but those who decry "Tories and bankers" whilst defending the tax, social responsibility and reputation of travellers need to look deeply at the moral compass they use to decide who to hate and who to defend.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 04:45 AM

In 1962 Eric Lubbock , of the then Liberals, was elected MP for Orpington in a by-election in the safe Conservative seat. He obtained a 22% swing. This amazing result led to him being dubbed the Orpington Man. In 1968 Mr Lubbock produced another rabbit from the hat in the form of the Caravan Sites Bill which, equally amazingly, began as a private members bill sponsored by him which gained government support. The Caravan Sites Act 1968, which contained a duty on local authorities to provide sites, led to the creation of the 350 local authority Gypsy/Traveller sites that now exist in England. But since the repeal of the duty to provide sites this figure has remained static.

The obvious answer to the 'problem' of unauthorised encampments and sites owned by Gypsies and Travellers where they don't have the necessary planning permission is the provision of authorised sites. Despite this the Conservative MP Simon Kirby has actually introduced a bill to make the eviction powers of local authorities and the police even more draconian. Presumably this bill is intended to completely destroy the Gypsy and Traveller way of life.

The Caravan Sites Bill 2011 introduced by Lord Avebury (formerly Eric Lubbock MP), with its first reading on 30th November 2011, intends to re-introduce the duty on local authorities to provide or to facilitate the provision of sites. Lord Avebury stated;

"Gypsies and Travellers are still the most deprived of all communities in the UK, and this is partly because one in five of those who live in caravans are homeless. The formula that worked after 1968, reinforced by an obligation to grant enough planning permissions to eliminate the deficit, could make a big contribution towards their security and stability".
there is a glaringly obvious question to be asked, if there is no discrimination against travelers, why was it necessary for Lubbock to introduce his bill, there is disacrmination against travellers in the uk and ireland, just because at this moment of time a sign cannot be found saying no travellers wanted, it does not follow that discrimination does not still exist.It does still exist in both countries.
this whole thread has become ridiculous

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Sep 12 - 04:55 AM

glaringly obvious question to be asked, if there is no discrimination against travelers,

No-one is denying that there is discrimination, least of all me.
I am with Jim on that.
I deplore it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 03:44 AM

"..... than in the minds of those who don't even live here."
I see you seem to have fallen into Keith's slime pit - this is a really slimeball line of argument - little England writ large - "if you don't live here then you have no right to comment" - Jeeze, what's with you people?
If you feel you have any insight into Travellers' life in Britain that I don't, please feel free to offer it.
Where I have lived for the last dozen years is massively outweighed by the other 60 years I lived in Britain - Liverpool, Manchester and London, in that order. Half of those 60 years in Britain were spent in association with Travellers, probably the most rewarding and educational period of my life.
I found Travellers the most hospitable, welcoming and generous-to-a-fault people I ever met, far from the suspicious and secretive sub-species they have, and are still been painted. This is despite most of them having to live in abject poverty in Third World conditons and harrased and abused on a daily basis.
They are the vicitims of systematic abuse by the state, the media and by many of the general populace - try making a programme like 'My Big Fat Black/Asian/Jewish Wedding" and then wait for the response to come rolling in.
Far from choosing to live outside society, they have been deliberately driven out. A third of the Travelling population in Britain have no practical right to exist - they have no officicial sites for their homes to stop on; the majority of the official sites that do exist have a single stand-pipe for water, no sewage and no electricity. If they move into houses they are harrased and persecuted - I'd have enough money to buy every one of them a site if I had a £ for every time someone has asked my "how would you like one of them living next door to you?".
There is little in practical terms to choose between what is happening to Travellers in Britain and what happens in Ireland, it's just that the abuse here is more visibly blatent and less well-hidden than it is in the UK.
Not so long ago an Irish TD (equivilant to a UK member of parliament) proposed that all Travellers should be compulsarily electronically tagged - an up-to-date version of the Jewish yellow star.
This is little more than ethnic cleansing and is accepted as such by many people who work with Travellers, and it's happening on our own doorsteps.
I suggest that before people pontificate about Travellers, they arm themselves with a few facts instead of inbuilt and media and establishment-driven prejudices, and even a little face-to-face personal experience - who knows, they might even enjoy it, perish the thought!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 03:55 AM

I suggest that before people pontificate about Travellers

No-one has Jim.
Just saying that the signs are not "common throughout Britain" and that we are not "deeply racist."

Also, no-one is saying, "if you don't live here then you have no right to comment"

Comment as much as you like, but allow us to tell you what is common throughout our country and what is not.
Whatever you have been told, we know the signs are not common throughout Britain.
They are extremely rare, if they exist any more at all.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 05:22 AM

The Osbournes: Season 2, Episode 11
My Big Fat Jewish Wedding (11 Feb. 2003)

My Big Fat Greek Wedding is a 2002 Canadian-American romantic comedy film written by and starring Nia Vardalos and directed by Joel Zwick

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 05:32 AM

Not so long ago an Irish TD (equivilant to a UK member of parliament) proposed that all Travellers should be compulsarily electronically tagged

Could you tell me who and when please, Jim?

Thank you

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 08:29 AM

The post about wedding films was me.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 08:51 AM

Asian Weddings: Something Gold, Nothing Borrowed ...www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01h2c3nCached

Yasmeen Khan explores the bling-filled world of the British Asian wedding

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 01:33 PM

Guest Ed
"Could you tell me who and when please, Jim?"
The quote in the link here is from a book we have on our shelves -'The Irish Tinkers - The Urbanisation of an Itinerant people', by George Gmelch.
The quote on the web reads:
"How does one approach the marginalization of aboriginal peoples.
The politician advocating that all Travellers be electronically tagged....."
I have read the book in full over this year and I know it includes the name of the politician and the date (1999, I seem to remember.)
Can't find it immediately, but will try again later.
http://www.cpsa-acsp.ca/papers-2011/Heritz.pdf

"Just saying that the signs are not "common throughout Britain"
The moronic repetition of this does not make it any the less untrue and certainly in no way contradicts the evidence put in front of you -Stewart and the Runnymede Trust in particular, both responsible and unsensational works, which you have dismissed as "agenda ridden spokespersons trying to justify their pay-packets."
"Also, no-one is saying, "if you don't live here then you have no right to comment"
Yes - you have said it here and elswhere, it seems something you trot out wenever you find yourself in a corner.
"They are extremely rare, if they exist any more at all. "
And once again you are calling me and the friends I spoke to while in England liars.
Earlier up this thread you denied having said that they don't exist, now you appear to be back to square one - stick to the script!
If you wish to prove a point address the information you have been given.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 01:50 PM

Incidentally - the electronic tagging solution is by no means the most extreme proposal(even if you don't count Harry Watton's "exterminate the impossible" suggestion to be found in its chilling fullness at the end of 'The Travelling People').
Mikeen McCarthy was encouraged to become involved by his father when he wrote to 'The Kerryman' in response to the suggestion, again by a T.D. that "all Travellers should be rounded up and forcibly settled on an ofshore island"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 02:54 PM

PPS
"and that we are not "deeply racist."
You are certainly "deeply racist" - or a liar over 18 months - which is it to be.
The evidence of Britain's racism has also been put before you and you have, true to form, ignored it
Again - answer the arguments and stop doing parrot impressions
Bye all University Challenge calls
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Sep 12 - 03:07 PM

I am not interested in arguing with you.
I keep repeating that the signs are not common throughout Britain because that is my whole case.
And they are not, as witness everyone else on this thread without exception.
Sorry if that makes you a liar, but that is the situation.

I know that you falsely accuse me of racism, but your "deeply racist" epithet was to all of us here in Britain.
I think you should take it back Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 03:51 AM

"I keep repeating that the signs are not common throughout Britain because that is my whole case."
My point exactly - no evidence to contradict the evidence produced, no attempt to question the statements by The Runnymede Trust or Sir Angus Frazer or the Travellers who still are victims to this prejudice, no comment on the court case that made it illegal to put up "No Traveller" signs (if they didn't exist in significant numbers, why have a trial at all?), no comment on the fact that though it is illegal to put up no "no no Gypsy" signs, putting up "no Traveller" signs is a 'grey area' no personal experience with Travellers, no attempt to put up a defence for the proven abuses by 'non-racist' Britain's driving whole ethnic communities to the point of extinction with draconian policies and vindictive ignorance and neglect.
There are 300,000 gypsies and Travellers in Britain today, most of them will die prematurely due to the lack of basic facilities like clean water, sanitation, rubbish collection - the avarage life expectancy of a Traveller in Britain today is 10% less than that of a settled person.
If you have evidence that the facts reproduced by all the groups and individuals that have been put up here which you have chosen to ignore, are lies or distortion, please produce it - otherwise it is you who is the agenda-driven liar.
I produced those facts for examination, I described our own experiences - all documented, archived and available - you, by your own admission, have produced nothing but denial: "I keep repeating that the signs are not common throughout Britain because that is my whole case."
THIS IS NOT A CASE.
"was to all of us here in Britain."
Another deliberate distortion of what I have written.
I have said consistently that there is a significant amount of racism in Britain to make it a problem: IF I HAVE EVER SAID THAT EVERYBODY IN BRITAIN IS A RACIST - PLEASE POINT OUT WHERE I HAVE SAID IT.
I have produced evidence that this is the case, which you in your usual fashion have chosen to ignore.
"I think you should take it back Jim."
Your racism stands as fact until you produce the evidence to prove otherwise.
You wrote what you wrote about Pakistani males and have lied about your reasons for doing so for 18 months - and you suggest it is me who is lying
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 04:01 AM

30thAug. 9.39AM
" Britain is a deeply racist country"
No we are not Jim, and we are more tolerant than where you are.

We who live here know from our own experience that the signs are not common throughout Britain.
That is why I challenge you on it.
You are wrong.
I make no claims, but I do not believe they even exist any more.
If they do they are vanishingly rare.
Please provide the actual paragraph where your experts say otherwise, and not just links to pages of text.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 07:45 AM

it is you who is the agenda-driven liar.

Please remember that it is not just me Jim.
It is you who is out on a limb and pissing into the wind.

NOT ONE contributor accepts your claim about the signs being common.
NOT ONE contributor is convinced by your "evidence."
NOT ONE contributor has seen more than a couple in their whole lives, and most have seen none at all!
NOT ONE contributor has agreed that Britain is particularly racist.
You are utterly on your own.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 08:29 AM

Jim:
"I keep repeating that the signs are not common throughout Britain because that is my whole case."
My point exactly - no evidence to contradict the evidence produced

Has it ever been explained to you that it is very difficult (if not impossible) to prove a negative.

If you can provide examples of many places where these signs may currently be found then you would be justified in stating that they are 'common' in the UK.
Until such time as you can 'prove' your accusation, we can rely on the UK's presumption of innocence.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 01:32 PM

I have mostly bypassed this tedious and overheated mess, but I will make one point Jim.

The fact that you felt moved to mention the race riots in support of your claims that Britain is racist, points up the weakness of your argument.

You need solid evidence which is rather less than 54 years out of date.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 02:39 PM

OK Jim - You say that you have not said that the people of various cities are racist. Yet you happily repeat the statement that Britain is a deeply racist country Well, sorry, but you can't have it both ways. The country is made up of cities. Those cities are made up of people. Neither the buildings nor their underlying geology can possibly be racist so what do you mean by Britain is a deeply racist country? For the whole nation to be deeply racist the people therein must also be.

BTW - You mixed my words with someone elses when you tried to refute that you were calling the people of Britain racist. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you did it by accident rather than design. Either way it was a very poor attempt to discredit what I was saying.

I ask the same question but rephrase it. What is the difference between Britain is a deeply racist country and saying that the people of Britain are deeply racist? Are you happy to conclude that the whole nation has this peculiar character flaw? If not - Then please stop saying it.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 05:14 PM

Do you know why these people calling themselves "travellers" like to keep on the move? It's because they don't like to pay the charges for a pitch on land set aside by local councils for "travellers".

Instead, they prefer to cause considerable damage breaking in to local parks, moving from one to another when evicted. When they are squatting, they behave antisocially, make a disgusting mess and waste a considerable amount of public money to clear up.

But never mind there are moves to ensure that they can be evicted from our locality very quickly indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 05:59 PM

What is the difference between Britain is a deeply racist country and saying that the people of Britain are deeply racist?
   A CONSIDERABLE DIFFERENCE. The second implies ALL the people of Britain are deeply racist, the first is saying something different.
England is a deeply racist country so is Ireland, I have met several English people who hated the Welsh[they were from Bristol], English people who hated West indians but not Africans,Irish people who hate the English, Irish people who hate Germans, BUT that does not mean all english or irish people are racist

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 06:23 PM

Enter Tom Lehrer singing "National Brotherhood Week"

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 08:01 PM

'that does not mean all english or irish people are racist'

Supposing we are...? Supposing we're all racist. Can't help it. Original sin, its in our DNA.

What's a gang of sixty odd year old farts like us supposed to do about it? sack cloth and ashes...? Mea Culpa...? Forgive me Father I have sinned. I laughed at Frank Carson's irish jokes.


Too weird Jim AND Keith....!

Let it go. You may be right. You may be wrong. I tend to think you wouldn't notice the notices if they didn't concern you.

Try and get used to the possibility that you may have spent your lives being wrong about most things. It doesn't alter the way you feel. And the way you feel doesn't alter the facts.

Jesus got one thing right... abit of humility ....pulease...!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: ollaimh
Date: 18 Sep 12 - 09:00 PM

there are many fine things about english culture, but it is deeply racist and class bigoted on mnay levels. unfortunately america is not a lot better. bob dylan said recently that slavery ruined america. they have never recovered.

the genocide against amerindians arficans and irish ruined england.

i wish more people would think for a while about the simple fact that england has brought war and war crimes to almost every corner of the globe. it nice to imagine you are bringing civilization but you were comming to take wealth, and lives--by necessity

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 02:50 AM

BAW and GSS, I agree entirely with what you say, except BAW "I tend to think you wouldn't notice the notices if they didn't concern you."

That is disingenuous Al.
You know that such an inflammatory notice would be jarring and cause a reaction.
Other contributors have stated the same.
Opposing discrimination is not furthered by making false claims, and I think it a reasonable response to question such a claim.

Both your comments on racism were reasonable, balanced and unexceptional.
Jim, who has a history of denigrating Britain, actually singled out Britain as being exceptionally racist.
He then compounded that inflammatory statement by saying that the only racists you find in Ireland are people who have lived in Britain or USA.
Why should such blatantly bigoted statements go unchallenged?
Did you consider contacting him privately, as friends, and suggest he tone down his attacks on us and be a little more conciliatory, like you two?
Does he not deserve a little of your criticism for fomenting this debate, or is it only those annoyed by him who are wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 04:19 AM

No necessity about it O, just sheer naked greed by the meanest people around. Then they wonder why no one in the world likes them, poor misunderstood little Englanders.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 05:08 AM

"The fact that you felt moved to mention the race riots in support of your claims that Britain is racist"
I have had the good grace to admit that I was wrong on Notting Hill Don - why not have the good grace to accept that fact. My comment on the was that the people on the film clip appeared 'ordinary'
I could have mentioned other race generated disturbances - Southall, Brixton, Toxteth, Tottenham - all sparked off by a history of insensitive policing bigotry and discrimination (not the sole cause by any means, but race played a large part in all of them).   
"Original sin, its in our DNA."
Sorry Al - "Original Sin" departed from the bosom of our family when my father was excommunicated for fighting in Spain - "Away with all your superstitions" as the song says.
"actually singled out Britain as being exceptionally racist."
No I didn't - I made no comparisons with other countries; I am well aware of the racism that exists in the US, former Yugoslavia, Germany (still), France (was part of the Singers Club exodus from its premises when the Cora Hotel allowed Le Pen's daughter to hold a conference there)....
To excuse British racism by pointing to the racism of others is a cowardly cop-out.
I found many of the people in the cities I lived and worked in deeply racist - so much so, I learned never to discuss race at work for fear of starting an argument (a fact I still feel deeply ashamed of).
This has been a lifetime's experience:
I worked on the Liverpool docks where the public toilets were designated 'men' and 'Asiatics' - long gone, TBTG.
I remember being told by a plumber I was working with the "we live next to an Irish family so I always have to check under my car before I drive away in the morning".
I saw the East End dockers march in support of Powell's 'rivers of blood' speech.
I was invited to NF meetings by people who told me "these guys know what they're talking about".
The the first job I applied to in London (by phone), I was asked what colour I was.
When I started working with Travellers I was told, again by a workmate, that it was the custom among them for the father to "break in his daughters with his finger" before she could attain adulthood.
I witnessed first hand (and had described at length) the treatment meted out to Travellers, the bribes taken by the police to leave them unmolested, the arrest of the young teenage boy who was taken from London to the north of England on suspicion of burglary, then left outside a police station to make his own way back to his family (14 years of age.
And I saw these signs, and was part of the campaign to have them made illegal (and I know they still exist, despite Keith's moronic mantra).
And by the way "inflammatory notices" are not "inflammatory" when they only echo the opinions of a people who have a deep -seated hatred towards Travellers - want me to put up the 1,000 years of prejudice article again?) Don is quite right when he says "you wouldn't notice the notices if they didn't concern you" - I certainly didn't see them before I became involved, but within a week of becoming so I not only saw them, but was scouting around Ladbroke Grove looking for pubs that would serve me and my Traveller friends.
I have never claimed that Britain is any more racist than anywhere else, nor do I believe it is - I can only say that it is the most racist country I have lived in (only 2).
Britain is my country - that did not cease to be a fact when I moved here, and my family still live there and are well able to articulate their own experiences which, by and large, confirm mine.
While I have concerns on racism internationally, I feel my only direct responsibility is to that I believe exists in Britain (and in Ireland,where I now live).
Unlike Keith, I don't attribute problems such as these to 'cultural implants'; nor will I accept in a million years Al's genetic explanation.
As I've repeated ad nauseum - I think racism is a complex mixture of natural suspicion of strangers, a gutter media (like the bum-fodder Daily Mail who has made anti-immigration its raison d'etre), the insecurity of rising unemployment, the attempted manipulation of our minds by sewer dwellers like the BNP and ENP and many other things.
My generation was very much influenced by the sunset of Empire years, when we were still singing hymns that told us that to be foreign was "in error's chain" (see From Greenland's Icy Mountains), and when we were taught in school that we only enslaved most of the world to bring enlightenment - but that's all but gone now (also TBTG)
I believe ollaimh is spot on with his/her comparisons.
Must go - have to pack for the Frank Harte weekend (now there was a lovely non racist very human - human being)
I suggest that those who have any doubts about Brian's deep-seated racism follow up some of my links above, seek out some of their own "racism in Britain" works wonders, or simply strike up a onversation in your local about immigration, or Muslims.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 05:30 AM

You singled out Britain by declaring us deeply racist without referring to anyone else.
I notice you think Ollaimh "spot on" the genocide against amerindians arficans and irish ruined england.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 06:12 AM

The problem as I see it is that a minority of travellers cause problems particularly after drinking alcohol , but then so do a minority of non travellers.
in my experience some irish and scottish[particularly glaswegians] often drink without eating any food, they then get completely paralytic, and behave badly, this then gives all irish and scottish people a bad name.
this is exactly what happens to Travellers, a few of them get paralytic argue and fight amongst themselves and smash up pubs, however it does not follow that all travellers do this, statistically it is a minority that cause problems
the same thing happens with west indians, a few of them have all night reggae parties, the next thing is they are all stereo typed.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: johncharles
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 06:38 AM

Television has been doing travellers no favours, with programmes such as big fat gypsy wedding and bare knuckle fighting, which only serve to reinforce the stereotypical view of their culture as being dominated by sexism and violence.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 07:05 AM

The problem as I see it is that a minority of travellers cause problems particularly after drinking alcohol , but then so do a minority of non travellers.

Comments which neither help, nor clarify. "a minority of travellers" may be as little as 0.1%, or as great as 49.9%.
The same is true for "a minority of Glaswegians".

With such wide terms of reference you cannot (reasonably)claim to be comparing like with like!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 07:44 AM

"You singled out Britain by declaring us deeply racist without referring to anyone else."
I have said over and over again - each country needs to take responsibility for its own failings and no hide behind those of others.
Taking this as a logic it would be impossible to discuss any subject such as this - it is always possible to find somewhere worse
"irish ruined england."
My support for O's statement was a general one on British racism and you know it - we have argued enough about Ireland for you to be aware of my views.
I certainly believe there are parallels to be drawn with Amerindians. and the treatment of Travellers in Britain and Ireland.
Are you really incapable of taking part in these discussions without reducing them to sewer level with your deliberate distortions and misrepresentations?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 07:56 AM

When I asked you, "deeply racist compared to who" you said you had no knowledge of racism in any other country.
Please identify which bit of Ollaimh's short post was "spot on" in your opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,keith A
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 08:18 AM

This is what is left.

there are many fine things about english culture, but it is deeply racist and class bigoted on mnay levels. unfortunately america is not a lot better. bob dylan said recently that slavery ruined america. they have never recovered.

i wish more people would think for a while about the simple fact that england has brought war and war crimes to almost every corner of the globe. it nice to imagine you are bringing civilization but you were comming to take wealth, and lives--by necessity

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 09:23 AM

Are you all having a good time??

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 10:00 AM

"there are many fine things about english culture, but it is deeply racist and class bigoted on mnay levels. unfortunately america is not a lot better. bob dylan said recently that slavery ruined america. they have never recovered. the genocide against amerindians arficans"
If you believe I subscribe to any other part of his message - feel free to point it out.
I have made my point consistently that to hide behind the racism of others is both apoligist and cowardly.
What happens elsewhere makes not one iota of difference to British racism - stop hiding behind the crimes of others.
You really are at slimeball level now - you really are the pits.
Maybe it's time to put up my PM to you - it certainly sums up my opinion of your behaviour.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 10:05 AM

Comments which neither help, nor clarify. "a minority of travellers" may be as little as 0.1%, or as great as 49.9%.
The same is true for "a minority of Glaswegians".

With such wide terms of reference you cannot (reasonably)claim to be comparing like with like!
yes it f##### does, it proves that the minority behaviour gets a group stereo typed

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 11:20 AM

Comments which neither help, nor clarify. "a minority of travellers" may be as little as 0.1%, or as great as 49.9%.
The same is true for "a minority of Glaswegians".

With such wide terms of reference you cannot (reasonably)claim to be comparing like with like!
yes it f##### does, it proves that the minority behaviour gets a group stereo typed

It proves no such thing.
But as I can see that you're not amenable to reasoned argument I shall leave this discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 11:49 AM

"I shall leave this discussion. "
Please don't Nigel - this thread needs all the common sense it can get.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 12:44 PM

common sense?
listen,racial and ethnic groups such as travellers frequently get stereo typed on the basis of the misbehaviour of a few,
Nigel Parsons trying to dispute that is not common sense, he is just being pedantic and argumentative for the sake of it.
only 3 days ago a publican, here in ireland who refused to serve some travellers[ his reason was they had too much to drink] was attacked, however that does not mean that all travellers attack publicans, however a publican must have the right to refuse customers if they are too drunk whether they are travellers or non travellers.
I do agree that journalists and the media do highlight and try and whip up anti traveller sentiment, but these attacks on pubs and publicans do happen here in ireland, it is my understanding that these incidents are occasional rather than common, it is also my understanding that these attacks are carried out by a small minority of travellers.
Jim, are you disputing that these attacks never happen.
here is an example

ENVIRONMENT Minister Phil Hogan has expressed relief that his publican brother wasn't seriously injured after he was attacked by an angry mob of Travellers.

Paddy Hogan had to be admitted to hospital on Sunday night after the incident in his pub, The Hogan Stand, in Tullow, Co Carlow.

Earlier in the day, Paddy had met his brother, Carlow-Kilkenny TD Phil Hogan, at Croke Park for Kilkenny's All-Ireland senior hurling clash with Galway.

However, shortly after he returned to work in Tullow, he was set upon by a gang of men and women who were members of the Travelling community.

Bottles, glasses and a hanging basket were flung at Mr Hogan as he tried to stop up to a dozen men and women entering his premises.

Phil Hogan told the Irish Independent that his brother was "very lucky he didn't lose an eye" in the attack.

"It was an anti-social binge and it's now a matter for the Garda Siochana," Phil Hogan said.

"It could have been more serious, but it was a horrific attack and very traumatic," he added.

Travellers' rights group Pavee Point spokesman Martin Collins said the attack was "highly regrettable".

"It is not acceptable, it is inexcusable that anybody would do this regardless of ethnic origin," he said.

He added: "I only hope that people will not generalise all Travellers as being inherently violent."

Paddy Hogan said he served a Traveller at around 10pm on Sunday night.

"He told me he had friends coming and I cautioned him to behave himself," he said.

Minutes later, another man appeared, who Mr Hogan deemed too drunk to serve. The group were drinking heavily in Tullow for a number of hours prior to arriving at The Hogan Stand. "I refused him. He had enough drank but then he grabbed a pint glass from another customer and tried to hit me in the face with it. Only that a customer grabbed him, it would have hit me in the face," he added.

With the aid of a customer, Mr Hogan tried to eject the aggressive man from the pub, but at the door they were met by a gang of up to a dozen men and women, all brandishing bottles and glasses.

"There's a lot of talk about Travellers' rights, but what about the publicans? If I refuse to serve someone, I'm in trouble, but what if I do serve someone and this happens? It's a no-win situation," Mr Hogan said.

Inside the pub, Mr Hogan's partner Trish Kennedy, a female member of staff, and almost 20 customers were stunned as the horrific scene unfolded.

"I've never seen anything like it. We locked all the doors and called the guards. No-one left until the guards arrived," said Mr Hogan.

"We were too afraid to stay here on Sunday night," admitted Mr Hogan, whose home is attached to the premises.

Mr Hogan spent three hours in hospital where he underwent X-rays, head scans and treatment for the cuts to his face.

President of the Vintners' Federation of Ireland Gerry Rafter last night expressed sympathy for Paddy Hogan.

"There are times when the law would appear to give little protection to legitimate business people, acting in the best interest of their business and their customers, and as a result the balance seems to be against people carrying out lawful business," he said.

He added: "That anomaly needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency so that consumers and publicans know exactly where they stand."

Tullow gardai confirmed that the matter is being investigated and CCTV footage has been downloaded.

"We have a certain number of suspects identified and an investigation in ongoing," stated Sgt Joe Hanley."
THIS IS THE IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER,Martin Collins       added: "I only hope that people will not generalise all Travellers as being inherently violent."THAT IS THE IMPORTANT THING TO REMEmBER ARE YOU RECEIVING ME Nigel Parsons,is that clear?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 01:55 PM

Dick -

What is the difference between Britain is a deeply racist country and saying that the people of Britain are deeply racist?
   A CONSIDERABLE DIFFERENCE. The second implies ALL the people of Britain are deeply racist, the first is saying something different.

Does not explain anything at all! Saying a banana is a yellow fruit whereas a loaf of bread is something different does NOT tell me what a loaf of bread is - Just that it is not a banana.

...the first is saying something different. Please explain. Just what is different? How can a country be racist while it's people are not?

I really want to know how a lump of clay, soil and rocks can be racist!

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 03:09 PM

"I really want to know how a lump of clay, soil and rocks can be racist!"
Sorry Dave - think you're hiding behind semantics, but for the sake of this argument......
I don't believe that all Britons are racist - nothing like it (had many friends in AA (not alcoholics anonymous), anti-Nazi league and numerous anti-racist groups, Turned out on numerous anti-Fascist demos myself.
But I do believe that racism is a serious enough problem in Britain not to be left unchecked.
I have given my personal reasons for believing this.
I also put up a load of quickly and effortlessly gathered links which say exactly this. If you are so certain I am wrong, why not demolish them?
I don't accept the idea that it is only 'extremists' or 'fanatics' who are racist - I found it virtually every day of my working life if I allowed myself to get drawn into discussions where the subject came up.
Why not try my suggestion - bring the subject up next time you are in the pub, or at work and tell me you were happy with the result.

This from the Daily Mail, which, with its record on immigration, is hardly likely to make it up "out of concern for its wage packet"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2151056/Is-Britain-racist-nation-One-Brits-admits-racist-according-poll.html
Jim Carroll   

IS BRITAIN A RACIST NATION? ONE IN THREE BRITS 'ADMITS TO BEING RACIST', ACCORDING TO POLL
Third admitted making comments or being involved in discussions which could be considered racist
Almost 40 per cent confessed to using the phrase 'I'm not a racist, but...' when discussing race issues
Anti-racism group said the poll was 'disappointing'
By Jill Reilly
PUBLISHED: 12:16 GMT, 28 May 2012 | UPDATED: 13:30 GMT, 28 May 2012

A third of Brits admit they are racist, a shock report has revealed.
The worrying figure emerged in a poll of 2,000 adults who were asked to honestly express their feelings about foreign nationals living and working in this country.
One in three admitted regularly making comments or being involved in discussions which could be considered racist.
Concerning results: The worrying figure emerged in a poll of 2,000 adults who were asked to honestly express their feelings about foreign naIs Britain a racist nation? One in three Brits 'admits to being racist', according to poll
Third admitted making comments or being involved in discussions which could be considered racist
Almost 40 per cent confessed to using the phrase 'I'm not a racist, but...' when discussing race issues
Anti-racism group said the poll was 'disappointing'
By Jill Reilly
PUBLISHED: 12:16 GMT, 28 May 2012 | UPDATED: 13:30 GMT, 28 May 2012
A third of Brits admit they are racist, a shock report has revealed.
The worrying figure emerged in a poll of 2,000 adults who were asked to honestly express their feelings about foreign nationals living and working in this country.
One in three admitted regularly making comments or being involved in discussions which could be considered racist.
Additionally, more than one in ten admitted they had been accused of being a racist by someone close to them.
More...
'You could end up coming back in a coffin': Sol Campbell warns England fans to stay away from Euro 2012
Nazi mob lies in wait for England fans: Riot police march into battle against thugs on Euro 2012 terraces - but turn a blind eye to racist chants and violence
Why I'm calling a truce on my war with Baroness Warsi
And almost 40 per cent confessed to using the phrase 'I'm not a racist, but ...' when discussing race issues facing Britain today.
Alarmingly, many felt their animosity towards foreigners was passed down by previous generations.
But the country's immigration policy also emerged as a trigger for emotions which could be considered racist.
The true extent of the racist undercurrent within the country was revealed in a nationally representative study carried out by OnePoll in which 88 per cent of the respondents classed themselves as 'White British'.
Anti-racism campaign group Hope Not Hate, said they were not 'surprised' by the poll results.
'These are very disappointing findings. The positive way to look at it the majority of Britain's shun this behaviour.
'It equally shows there is a long to way to go to tackle prejudice in sections of society.
It's disappointing - we know there is a long way to go and this poll merely underlines the fact.'
Yesterday a OnePoll spokesman said: 'What constitutes being racist will always be a contentious issue.
'What one person deems inappropriate the next person may not.
'The opinions and beliefs of our parents and grandparents are bound to be a factor in the way we address other people regardless of their nationality or skin colour.
'Likewise life experience and cultures we have grown-up in are inevitably going to influence our beliefs and the language we use.
Other factors which many feel stir up anti-foreign emotions was the environment or neighbourhood people currently live in.
88,000 CHILDREN BRANDED RACISTS: PUPILS AS YOUNG AS 3 REPORTED
Last week figures revealed that tens of thousands of children – including some as young as three – have been accused of racism at school.
Data from 90 councils detail 87,915 'racist incidents' at primary and secondary schools between 2007 and 2011.
The number of recorded incidents would be substantially higher if the picture was replicated across all 200 local authorities in England, Wales and Scotland.
The figures triggered incredulity over the labelling of so many young children as 'racists' over playground spats.
Previous research has suggested that dozens of nursery pupils were among those being reported for name-calling.
This includes a study by the Manifesto Club, a civil liberties think-tank, which found evidence that nearly 50 under-fours had been effectively branded racists.
Life experience was also hailed as a reason.
The study also found one in five accept the fact people around them make disparaging remarks about different ethnic groups - and are not bothered by it.
Age-wise, the over 55s were found to have the biggest chips on their shoulders, with the 18-24 age range close behind.
The younger of these two brackets were also more likely to admit making racist comments or partaking in behaviour which could be deemed racist.
The Government's immigration policy was slammed by many of those who took part in the study.
Seventy one per cent said they felt the 'open doors' approach to foreign nationals was leading to an increase in racist feelings.
As many as one in six demanded Britain close its doors to anyone who is not a UK national.
Just over four out of ten said they felt a strict number of immigrants should be allowed in at any one time.
A OnePoll spokesman added: 'It's alarming that so many people are just accepting the racist behaviour around them.
'Nobody should feel an outsider in their own community.
'The findings did show that immigration policy was fuelling the fire for racist behaviour amongst some adults.
'But immigration and race are two separate issues although these findings show that many believe one is a consequence of another.'
tionals living and working in this country
Additionally, more than one in ten admitted they had been accused of being a racist by someone close to them.

More...
'You could end up coming back in a coffin': Sol Campbell warns England fans to stay away from Euro 2012
Nazi mob lies in wait for England fans: Riot police march into battle against thugs on Euro 2012 terraces - but turn a blind eye to racist chants and violence
Why I'm calling a truce on my war with Baroness Warsi
And almost 40 per cent confessed to using the phrase 'I'm not a racist, but ...' when discussing race issues facing Britain today.
Alarmingly, many felt their animosity towards foreigners was passed down by previous generations.
But the country's immigration policy also emerged as a trigger for emotions which could be considered racist.
Opposed: The Government's immigration policy was slammed by many of those who took part in the study. Seventy one per cent said they felt the 'open doors' approach to foreign nationals was leading to an increase in racist feelings
The true extent of the racist undercurrent within the country was revealed in a nationally representative study carried out by OnePoll in which 88 per cent of the respondents classed themselves as 'White British'.
Anti-racism campaign group Hope Not Hate, said they were not 'surprised' by the poll results.
'These are very disappointing findings. The positive way to look at it the majority of Britain's shun this behaviour.
'It equally shows there is a long to way to go to tackle prejudice in sections of society.
It's disappointing - we know there is a long way to go and this poll merely underlines the fact.'
Yesterday a OnePoll spokesman said: 'What constitutes being racist will always be a contentious issue.
'What one person deems inappropriate the next person may not.
'The opinions and beliefs of our parents and grandparents are bound to be a factor in the way we address other people regardless of their nationality or skin colour.
'Likewise life experience and cultures we have grown-up in are inevitably going to influence our beliefs and the language we use.
Other factors which many feel stir up anti-foreign emotions was the environment or neighbourhood people currently live in.
88,000 CHILDREN BRANDED RACISTS: PUPILS AS YOUNG AS 3 REPORTED
Last week figures revealed that tens of thousands of children – including some as young as three – have been accused of racism at school.
Data from 90 councils detail 87,915 'racist incidents' at primary and secondary schools between 2007 and 2011.
The number of recorded incidents would be substantially higher if the picture was replicated across all 200 local authorities in England, Wales and Scotland.
The figures triggered incredulity over the labelling of so many young children as 'racists' over playground spats.
Previous research has suggested that dozens of nursery pupils were among those being reported for name-calling.
This includes a study by the Manifesto Club, a civil liberties think-tank, which found evidence that nearly 50 under-fours had been effectively branded racists.
Life experience was also hailed as a reason.
The study also found one in five accept the fact people around them make disparaging remarks about different ethnic groups - and are not bothered by it.
Age-wise, the over 55s were found to have the biggest chips on their shoulders, with the 18-24 age range close behind.
The younger of these two brackets were also more likely to admit making racist comments or partaking in behaviour which could be deemed racist.
The Government's immigration policy was slammed by many of those who took part in the study.
Seventy one per cent said they felt the 'open doors' approach to foreign nationals was leading to an increase in racist feelings.
As many as one in six demanded Britain close its doors to anyone who is not a UK national.
Just over four out of ten said they felt a strict number of immigrants should be allowed in at any one time.
A OnePoll spokesman added: 'It's alarming that so many people are just accepting the racist behaviour around them.
'Nobody should feel an outsider in their own community.
'The findings did show that immigration policy was fuelling the fire for racist behaviour amongst some adults.
'But immigration and race are two separate issues although these findings show that many believe one is a consequence of another.'

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 03:21 PM

for gods sake, stop pretending, england and ireland are deeply racist countries, that does not mean that every person is a racist.
stop playing with words.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 04:16 PM

I've never seen such a fuss about a bunch of thorough nuisances, get a life for Clapton's sake!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 05:23 PM

"" the genocide against amerindians arficans and irish ruined england.""

Do you know, I never realised that the US 5th and 7th Cavalry and all those settlers, who slaughtered the Indians, were English.

Well, you do learn something new every day.

But I don't recall any historical reference to ""arficans"", so I suppose we must have killed 'em all.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Sep 12 - 05:38 PM

""IS BRITAIN A RACIST NATION? ONE IN THREE BRITS 'ADMITS TO BEING RACIST', ACCORDING TO POLL""

A poll of 2000 people out of 67 million.

Chosen how?.....unknown!
Ethnic origin?.....unknown!
Demographic spread?.....unknown

Oh well, I suppose that conclusion must be right then.

And you guys are lecturing US about not drawing conclusions about a group from the actions of a minority?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 02:49 AM

I believe ollaimh is spot on with his/her comparisons.

Come on Jim dear.
Which bit of all that bollocks was spot on?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 02:55 AM

"A poll of 2000 people out of 67 million."
Opinion polls are funny things aren't they, useful when it suits our arguments, denigrated when they don't. Hope I never go on record as quoting anything bum-fodder like the Daily Mail as gospel, but this, and all the other articles linked (carefully tip-toed around by all here) are indications of the extent of racism in Britain today - no more. 88,000 schoolchildren accused of racism at school is enough to bring the bile to my throat.
"the genocide against amerindians arficans and irish ruined england."
O's somewhat inarticulate posting was a clumsy attempt to compare American and British racism - isn't that what Keith has been demanding since racism became the subject here?
I disassociate myself from the Irish comment, though I shouldn't have to given my track record.
I wouldn't have put Don down as a scoring-points-by-pointing-out-typos man, but there you go; it takes all sorts....
Off to Dublin
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 03:05 AM

I disassociate myself from the Irish comment

So you think we are somehow to blame for what US did to the Native Americans!

Did they not side with the British in the War of Independence?
They guessed what was coming to them, and they were right.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Musket
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 04:51 AM

Wow, getting your head around this one is rather taxing.

A bloke who is English reckons all English people are racist bigots, but as he chooses to live in another country, he feels he can say it.

I don't really want to go Jim Carroll hunting, mainly for three reasons. 1. I reckon he genuinely believes some of the stuff he writes, and with regard to child abuse by clerics, I find little to disagree with him. 2. Most people get such a long answer from him, often in hard to read red print, that you lose the will to live reading it. 3. He rarely wishes to debate with me and ignores me anyway. Possibly for my heinous crime of saying that if a song is sung in a folk club, ergo it is a folk song.

But on this.. I am somewhat confused. I don't think signs are that common. I live near Doncaster. which is a bit of a magnet for the travelling community, especially in winter, and apart from the "No racing of horse drawn vehicles" signs on a double carriageway north of the town, which might not be there any more, it was a few years since I saw it, there are no signs in any of the pubs / shops etc I frequent.

I have made two points regarding equality and the travelling community though, that I personally feel cannot be overlooked. Firstly, if any community wishes to have any dialogue with the rest of society, there are minimum stipulations, both in the field of public health and contributing to what you make use of. Or in other words, getting your children vaccinated, seeing a doctor if you have symptoms of communicable disease and giving the government their fair share of your profits, should you have any.

Then and slowly, the preconceived images portrayed here and elsewhere might dwindle to memory, rather than be perpetuated.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Alan Whittle
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 05:56 AM

bum fodder - a striking metaphor = sounds as if your bum is eating the Daily Mail. Waking up after a late night gig, it was an arresting image ......one that may stay with me for some time.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 10:59 AM

""88,000 schoolchildren accused of racism at school is enough to bring the bile to my throat.""

Accused?....Come back when they've been convicted and you mighty have a point.

You must be desperate not to realise that almost all those accusations are based in nothing more than excessively PC reactions to kids verbally lashing out without thought.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 11:14 AM

""Opinion polls are funny things aren't they, useful when it suits our arguments, denigrated when they don't.""

Only useful if they involve a group properly representative of the total being assessed and sufficiently large for the results to be significant.

2000 out of 67 million?.....Simply nowhere near a statistically significant sample, even if correctly representative of the whole population.

Take 2000 people from Bradford, or Southall and you'll get a very different result than from say Cheltenham, or Bath.

If anybody is seizing on favourable (but suspect) polls to bolster his bias, it is you Jim, and I, as anybody can see by checking my posts in the past, am usually an ally of yours against the likes of Keith and Co.

On this occasion, you have stepped over the line into racial bias against the British and more specifically the English.

BTW, I don't share your distaste for a gentle leg pull about a typo or two, and have fielded more than a few myself with nothing more than a rueful chuckle.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: The Sandman
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 01:10 PM

I have met Keith, Dve theGnome, Don T, I do not think any of them are racists

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Sep 12 - 02:08 PM

Thanks for the explanation, Jim. It was all I wanted and it is good to see that you do not believe that British people are racist. Maybe now that is out of the way we can also dispnse with the tabloid type phrases like 'Britain is deeply racist'?

I am more than happy to accept that there are a number of people everywhere that are racist. I have been subject to it when I was a kid with a Polish name in an English school. Which does, incidentaly, make me conclude that the 88,000 racist kids are just kids who know no better BTW.

I was also subject to it in Antigua when a crowd of black youths chanted 'White Nigger' at me.

I do not accept that the problem here is any greater than anywhere else. I do not believe for one minute that one ethnic group of people is any different to another group. To do so would be racist, surely? :-) But, having said that, I do not excuse British racism on the grounds that it the same everywhere. Racism will never be eliminated altogether. That, in my opinion, is beyond the scope of human nature.

What should happen and may happen eventualy is that most people will realise that that it is not acceptable to treat anyone differently on the grounds of sex, colour or creed. The only ones who should and must be treated differently are those with a proclivity to harm others. They are not an ethnic group of course but exist everywhere and in all societies.

As to the newspaper poll. Well, it is what it is. I don't think that 30% of people admitting racist feelings is significant anyway. I have had them myself. I doubt if there is anyone here who would deny every having a flash of anger at someone of a different race or laughing at what basicaly boils down to a racist joke. It would be far different if 30% oif people said they were actively racist and would or have caused harm to anyone on the grounds of ethnicity. But that is not the case.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Sep 12 - 03:05 AM

Well put Dave.
I agree with all that, and thank Jim for the clarification that "deeply racist" was not intended to imply "exceptionally racist."

Thanks for that testimonial GSS, and for your mediation in all this.

Don was not really seizing on a typo.
Why should we assume "arficans" meant "Africans."?
There was no genocide by Britain there?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Sep 12 - 04:59 AM

Jim was quite right about the survey.
It was carried out by a reputable polling company and the results can not be dismissed.
Those who chose to reply gave their honest views.
I believe all people are essentially the same, and the poll would get the same result in any country with a comparable background of recent large scale immigration, housing crisis and unemployment.

What is different about us is that we care about racism.
We demand that our teachers monitor the conversations of even tiny children, so that if in childish innocence they say something an adult recognises as racist, it is picked up and explained to be not acceptable.
Each silly incident is logged for future reference, to see if there is a persistent problem with any child to address.
The numbers of incidents are counted and reported, which makes the bile rise in Jim's throat, but should not.

Our governments, with the consent and support of the people, pass rigorous anti-discrimination laws which Travellers in Ireland envy because there are no such laws in Ireland to protect them.
Those same laws have eradicated the signs that are the subject of this thread.
Jim was wrong.
They were never common, and are no more.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Sep 12 - 09:47 AM

I wouldn't say they were never common, Keith. Even though I have lived for nearly 60 years in Manchester, one of the cities Jim quotes as being racist, I heve never seen one. But there is pleanty of evidence to show that such things did exist although I do not believe 'common' was a fair adjective to apply. Any more that I believed that deeply racist Britain was anything other than a tabloid attention grabber.

I would not say that they don't exist now either. Just because they are against the law does not mean that the die-hard diddycoy bashers will change their ways.

What I will heartily agree with is that we care. We will bring it out into the open and, where possible, do something about it. Surely that is a step in the right direction!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Sep 12 - 04:59 AM

A Traveller in Ireland quoted in Irish Times today.

In Britain, the ethnicity of Irish Travellers has been law since the case of O'Leary and Others v Punch Retail in 2000. In Northern Ireland, since 1997, Travellers have been classified as a "racial group" for the purposes of the Race Relations Order. And the world hasn't stopped turning.

These pieces of legislation admit Traveller ethnicity is a status equal to that of settled Irish ethnicity. Discrimination towards Travellers in Britain and Northern Ireland hasn't gone away, but younger Irish Travellers there have a stronger sense of pride and self-esteem.

Across the Border and across the Irish Sea, recognising Traveller ethnicity has had an impact. Travellers there have the opportunity to be treated with a new respect and accorded a more equal status in engaging with the state. The relationship shifts to a treatment that takes account of and respects cultural difference.

There's a symbolic value too – my identity, my history, my culture are still not validated. The 2010 All Ireland Traveller Health Study: Our Geels revealed a strong self-identification among our people. Membership of the Traveller community was important for 71 per cent; Traveller culture for 73 per cent; and Traveller identity for 74 per cent.

Yet the State will not recognise this identity and afford us the status that would go with such recognition.

Friendship with Katherine (a settled friend)is unlike that unequal relationship my mother had with settled women, where even to those she paid visits to she was still the subservient beggar at the door.

When Katherine talks about her days in school, the conversation is about expectation and entitlement. Ambition and opportunity are also built into the fabric of her memory.

The dialogue becomes fragile when I speak about my people being brought to special school where we were humiliated by being washed and ridiculed. Believing I wasn't worthy of an education, they relegated our ethnicity to the dirty corner and the special class.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Sep 12 - 07:41 AM

Link
Racism Towards Travellers hangs in the air in Ireland.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0927/1224324469927.html

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Paddy McBollox
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 10:19 AM

South & East London, 1990s: seen regularly.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 11:08 AM

Thread revived with an unsubstatiated (and very vague) claim from a Guest who is unwilling to identify himself.

Ho-Hum, here we go again!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Paddy McBollox
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 11:26 AM

Pretty rough pubs I worked in in Leytonstone and Kennington, for a start. Others that I drank in. Other pubs didn't have signs just told staff what to look and listen out for among the punters. If they looked like travellers and talked like travellers, they didn't get served. I watched people get turned away more than once.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 11:52 AM

Pretty rough pubs I worked in in Leytonstone and Kennington, for a start. Others that I drank in. Other pubs didn't have signs just told staff what to look and listen out for among the punters. If they looked like travellers and talked like travellers, they didn't get served. I watched people get turned away more than once.
Ah, right, I thought you were complaining about it. It turns out you condoned & supported it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 01:25 PM

There is little point in pursuing this squalid thread, especially when it is dominated by bigots who either ignore or deny documented facts.
Racial discrimination against Travellers is alive and thriving in Britain today; it may take different forms but there is no doubt it is very much still there.
I see no support for this from our guest, just an acknowlegement that was happening as described and consistently denied
Jim Carroll

A quick scan of the situation, then and now:
Legacy of Dale Farm: Nine months after £7m battle to remove travellers, the site that was meant to be green belt has become a fly-tippers' paradise
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2162933/Legacy-Dale-Farm-Nine-months-7m-battle-remove-travellers-site-meant-green-belt-fly-tippers-paradise.html

"Discrimination against Gypsies and Travellers appears to be the last „respectable‟ form of racism. It is still considered acceptable to put up „No Traveller‟ signs in pubs and shops and to make blatantly prejudiced remarks about Gypsies and Travellers."In education, Gypsy and Traveller children experience many disadvantages, not least their difficulties in accessing a stable education when they are moved on. According to the Department for Education and Skills, they have been seen as the "group most at risk in the education system". Good work has been done by some schools, Traveller Education Services and specific projects to provide an equal and inclusive education. However, children can still find that their culture is ignored, their needs are not met, there is bullying from other children, and a hostile reception in the neighbourhood. There are cases where schools have been closed or threatened with closure when Travellers were enrolled because other local parents mounted a campaign against them and withdrew their children.
A major study by the Department of Health found many health problems for Gypsies and
Travellers. They have „significantly poorer health status and significantly.......
www.canterbury.gov.uk/authority/assets/communitydevelop..

"I don't think that the situation in the UK has changed much since the 1960s – those 'No blacks, no dogs, no Gypsies signs' are not very far away.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/no-blacks-no-dogsno-gypsies-860873.html

Racism against Romanichal and other Travelling peoples is still endemic within Britain and until the 1960s signs in pubs declaring "No Blacks, No dogs, No Gypsies" could be found.[30] In 2008 the media reported that Gypsies experience a higher degree of racism than any other group in the UK, including asylum-seekers, and a Mori poll indicated that a third of UK residents admitted to being prejudiced against Gypsies.[30]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanichal

relations legislation has been in force in the United Kingdom since 1965 and has developed considerably to protect against increasingly subtle forms of discrimination, Gypsies and Travellers are still experiencing discrimination of the most overt kind: ‘No blacks, no Irish, no dogs’ signs disappeared decades ago, but the ‘No Travellers’ signs, used intentionally to exclude Gypsies and Travellers, are still widespread, indicating that discrimination against these groups remains the last ‘respectable’ form ofracism in the United Kingdom. This is supported by the findings of a 2003 Mori poll conducted in England in which 34 per cent of respondents admitted to being personally prejudiced against Gypsies and Travellers.
http://www.gypsy-traveller.org/your-rights/law/harassment-and-discrimination/Although race
"Discrimination against Gypsies and Travellers appears to be the last 'respectable' form of racism. It is still considered acceptable to put up 'No Traveller' signs in pubs and shops and to make blatantly prejudiced remarks about Gypsies and Travellers."
http://www.leicestershiretogether.org/gypsy_travellers_the_truth.pdf


If you saw a sign banning black people from a shop there would be outcry, yet signs banning travellers and Gypsies are still being used
Chris Myant, CRE
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/south_east/3683483.stm

There are still "No Travellers" signs in some pubs and shops, where Gypsies and Travellers face suspicion and extra scrutiny by security guards. They can meet outright public hostility and racism. A racist incident is "any incident which is perceived to be racially motivated by the victim or any other person". Gypsies and Travellers are often the target of such incidents, which can include verbal abuse, inappropriate jokes, damage to property, physical assault and even murder, like the murder of 13-year-old Johnny Delaney in Liverpool in 2003. The police, local authorities and other agencies have a responsibility to resolve racist incidents and protect victims. Public education is important in encouraging people to report harassment so it can be tackled.
http://www.bristol.gov.uk/sites/default/files/assets/documents/Myth%20busting%20booklet%20on%20Gypsies%20and%20Travellers.pdf

"Discrimination against Gypsies and Travellers appears to be the last 'respectable' form of racism. It is still considered acceptable to put up 'No Traveller' signs in pubs and shops and to make blatantly prejudiced remarks about Gypsies and Travellers.
"Gypsies and Travellers face discrimination across all indices including education, health and accommodation - only 20 % of pupils registered are in regular attendance at key stage three; and life expectancy is 10 years shorter for men and 12 years less for women than for the general population."
http://www.grtleeds.co.uk/information/CRE.html

In the Midlands positive work was being done to assert the human rights of travellers. Like the migrants from the Commonwealth, travelling communities faced racial discrimination and were refused entry to shops, clubs and public houses. 'No Gypsies' signs could be seen outside pubs and during local elections in 1970 conurbation action groups in the Midlands circulated leaflets which incited racial hatred against Irish travellers (Kenrick and Bakewell, 1990:26).
http://www.connectinghistories.org.uk/Learning%20Packages/Migration/migration_settlement_20c_lp_04a.asp


http://www.guardian.co.uk/housing-network/2012/oct/12/eric-pickles-gypsy-traveller-communities

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 02:31 PM

This thread was not about discrimination but about your assertion that the signs are common.
Our anon. Guest claims that he knew of some back in the 90s, but not convincing.
Even if true there is still no evidence at all that they are common now, and lots of well known Mudcatters stating, from their own experience, that they are not.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 02:39 PM

'Other pubs didn't have signs just told staff what to look and listen out for among the punters. If they looked like travellers and talked like travellers....'

so basically, as long as you didn't try and sell pegs or white heather, you were all right..

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 02:48 PM

"This thread was not about discrimination but about your assertion that the signs are common."
It is exactly about discrimination; the common appearance of these signs being only one form of this discrimination.
Their existence is one more highlighted by the links provided, which you will ignore as you have every other piece of documented evidence on every subject you have found yourself defending alone.
Now - where did I put my new year's resolution about jackbooted morons and black holes?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 03:12 PM

Their existence is one more highlighted by the links provided,

No such links were provided Jim, you old fibber!
You just made that up.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Paddy McBollox
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 03:12 PM

Nigel I did not approve. I never personally refused a travelling man a drink.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 06:00 PM

Nobody has denied there is blatant discrimination against travellers.

But none of the links Jim just gave says anything at all about "No Travellers" signs in pubs.

Which do not exist, any more than signs telling Negroes to sit in the back of the bus in Alabama, or the Welsh Knot, or the leper's bell.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Jan 13 - 08:53 PM

Back in the 1990s I can recall seeing them, sometimes in the windows of pubs I refrained from entering, sometimes in pubs I entered and left immediately. But I honestly can't remember seeing them for a good few years now, thank God. If I did I imagine I'd ask the licensing authorities to intervene.

Of course that doesn't mean there aren't going to be pubs that try to discriminate in other ways that are less likely to get them into trouble. But I am pretty sure that it is not accurate to say that overt signs are 'common' these days.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,John from Kemsing
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 09:45 AM

I have never seen any notices as described above in this neck of the woods these past 30 years but there are plenty of notices saying "Fly Tipping Is Illegal. See you In court".

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: MartinRyan
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 10:09 AM

"Fly Tipping Is Illegal.

Long time since i've seen that (lovely) use of "fly"!

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,John from Kemsing
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 10:25 AM

A notice I have seen in a number of pubs around here says, words to the effect, "NO DRUGS,PUSHERS OR DEALERS". Are the publicans being prejudicial and trampling on peoples rights?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 11:38 AM

"But none of the links Jim just gave says anything at all about "No Travellers" signs in pubs."

"No Traveller‟ signs in pubs and shops and to make blatantly prejudiced remarks about Gypsies and Travellers."In education,"
From Canterbury council
"www.canterbury.gov.uk/authority/assets/communitydevelop.."

"There are still "No Travellers" signs in some pubs and shops, where Gypsies and Travellers face suspicion and extra scrutiny by security guards. "
Bristol
"http://www.bristol.gov.uk/sites/default/files/assets/documents/Myth%20busting%20booklet%20on%20Gypsies%20and%20Travellers.pdf"

"Discrimination against Gypsies and Travellers appears to be the last 'respectable' form of racism. It is still considered acceptable to put up 'No Traveller' signs in pubs and shops and to make blatantly prejudiced remarks about Gypsies and Travellers."
Leicestershire
http://www.leicestershiretogether.org/gypsy_travellers_the_truth.pdf

"Discrimination against Gypsies and Travellers appears to be the last 'respectable' form of racism. It is still considered acceptable to put up 'No Traveller' signs in pubs and shops and to make blatantly prejudiced remarks about Gypsies and Travellers."
Leeds
http://www.grtleeds.co.uk/information/CRE.html

"'No Gypsies' signs could be seen outside pubs and during local elections in 1970 conurbation action groups in the Midlands circulated leaflets which incited racial hatred against Irish travellers (Kenrick and Bakewell, 1990:26)."
http://www.connectinghistories.org.uk/Learning%20Packages/Migration/migration_settlement_20c_lp_04a.asp

"No such links were provided Jim, you old fibber!"
Keith's selective dyslexia appears to be contagious - the lie is with him - as usual
The signs have been commonplace as long as we were involved with the Travellers; discrimination may have changed in form, but certainly not in effect
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jack Campin
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 12:06 PM

A source from 1990 saying such signs existed in 1970 is not much evidence that they are "common" today.

None of those references document the existence of such signs in the last generation. Local or national government bodies and quangos make a habit of responding to issues like specific forms of discrimination long after they've ceased to be something they actually have to put an effort into dealing with. You can always claim success in making a problem disappear if it already disappeared before you came on the scene. (That Bristol document is an honest attempt at doing something positive, but officialdom is just as prone to repeating urban legends as the general public).

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 01:00 PM

Jim, yet again you accuse me of lying.
I don't.
Look down the list of contributers.
Twenty plus of the most respected UK Mudcatters, and everyone denies your assertion.
Not one reports seeing a single one for years.
Decades even.
Is everyone of them a liar too?

We do not need you or your out of date links to tell us what is common in our country.
Unlike you, we live here.
We know what is common, and such signs certainly are not.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 01:00 PM

With respect Jack, your statment was:
"But none of the links Jim just gave says anything at all about "No Travellers" signs in pubs."
which was something I would expect from Keith.
My argument was that up to the 90s they were still common, certainly in London, and since then that they are still around, more in some places than others.
This from a Traveller newspaper 2006
"No Travellers? No Way!
Businesses that put up 'No Travellers' signs are being targeted by North Wales police and the Commission for Racial Equality. The force is the first in the country to take direct action on racist signs. "They are not acceptable in North Wales," said police officer Geoff Richardson, "and we want to get rid of the discrimination that underlies these notices."
Have you seen a 'No Travellers' sign down at your local? SEE Are you being served? Page 12"
The fact that the the action is "first in the country to take direct action" is indicative that not much has been done officially to get them removed.
I pointed out that our work with Travellers lasted up to 2005 when, certainly around Bristol, they were still common and we still had to travel miles to find a pub where our friends would be served.
Last years experience (described above) showed that while the signs might now be more strategically placed, the same discrimination is still around in a different form.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 01:14 PM

If the signs are so "strategically placed" that no-one can see them, are they really signs?

No-one here has ever denied that there is discrimination.
All your examples are no doubt true, but you have selected only UK examples, ignoring the FACT that Travellers suffer much worse discrimination in Ireland, which happens to be where you sit criticising us!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 01:21 PM

""Whether you call it racism or not, anti-Gypsy bigotry exists in a big way in this country and all over Europe, particularly fiercely in countries such as Romania, Hungary and Italybut what is most worrying about it is that it is more than acceptable. Although banning words from being heard is hardly any solution to racism, you will casually hear words like 'gippo' and 'pikey' on television and on the radio where you would never hear the words 'paki' and 'nigger'. Although it is hard to fathom today, it is shocking to find that there are places in the UK where you will find signs beside the entrance to establishments to the effect of 'We Do Not Serve Gypsies'. Imagine the outrage if establishments refused to serve black people or Jews!"
http://www.thecommentfactory.com/racism-against-gypsies-and-travellers-rampant-in-europe-3691/"
"If the signs are so "strategically placed" that no-one can see them, are they really signs?"
Inside pub porchways and over bars are not where "no-one can see them"
This has been pointed out earlier in this thread - read what people write.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 01:29 PM

No-one on this thread reported seeing signs for years.
Everyone stated that they had not.
Not in porches, not anywhere.
You can make a good case against discrimination without making up an issue that does not exist.
The signs do not exist.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 01:59 PM

Doncaster.

A19

Sign saying "No racing of horse drawn vehicles. "

A bit specific don't you think?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Nigel Parsons
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 02:23 PM

Not specific at all. The sign prevents anyone from racing horse drawn vehicles. If it stated "No racing of horse drawn vehicles by Travellers" it would be discriminatory.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 03:16 PM

"No-one on this thread reported seeing signs for years."
I suggest you read through it again.
You are now demonstrating why it is a total waste of time discussing with you.
I know that these signs existed in great numbers throughout the time we worked with them we saw them and experienced their effects. They were a part of our work - we helped list and photograph them for one of the Traveller organisations - our work was passed on to the GLC and helped start to start a move to tackle discrimination of Travellers (until Maggie dismantled it)
At the numerous lectures we gave, they featured as an example of anti-Traveller bigotry; at no time were we contradicted and often we were given further evidence, London - Sheffield - Manchester - Birmingham.
They were a fact of our lives for over 30 years.
Our recorded collection includes interviews where people spoke of them, and far worse examples of discrimination.
Our notebooks are full of references to these signs and as we write up our work, they are part of our record.
I am more than happy to accept that people have not seen these notices; up to the time we went out we were not aware of them, or for that matter, that there were any Travellers in the London area. As somebody (Don?) pointed out, why should you notice them if they don't concern you.
You have been given references to these notices throughout this thread yet you have not produced a single scrap of evidence as to why the organisations, councils, charities like The Runnymeade Trust.... should have lied about them, instead you describe them as seatwarmers who do what they do to keep themseves in a job.
You called me a liar a few postings back and when I responded with several exaples of references to the signs - no acknowledgement, no withdrawal... nothing - nor did I expect any.
Your sole defence for your case is that which you have just reiterated "you haven't seen them so they can't exist" - crassness in the extreme.
I am certainly not unhappy in finding myself at odds with you again; you are a bigotted racist and it would disturb me greatly to find we have anything in common.
What is happenning to Travellers in these islands in comaparble to ethnic cleansing - that was clear in the early sixties with the making of 'The Travelling People', and things have worsened sing John Major withdrew the law making it obligatory for councils to provide a set number of sites.
These signs are certainly not the worst form of discrimination, but they are part of their dehumanisation - the Yellow Stars of the Travelling people.
You have here, as you have on every other thread fillibusted the subject into meninglessness - I have no doubt whatever that you will, as usual, insist on having the last word.
If you have one single shred of evidence to prove that I or any other of the people who have given you evidence of this or any of the other forms of racist bigotry (other than "I haven't seen it"), feel free to present it - otherwise - please **** off.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 04:47 PM

Jim Carroll, you were wrong to state that" "No Travellers Served" is a common notice throughout Britain "
It is not

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 05:14 PM

I've never seen a No Pikeys sign, so that's alright then!!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 05 Jan 13 - 06:15 PM

""A notice I have seen in a number of pubs around here says, words to the effect, "NO DRUGS,PUSHERS OR DEALERS".""

A herring of a particularly ruddy hue, John mate.

I think you would have serious difficulty in persuading even the more gullible European Court that anyone has a "human right" or a "civil right" to break national statutes.

And far from a publican being accused of discrimination for banning pushers and junkies, he would more likely be indicted for "aiding and abetting" if he did not.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 06 Jan 13 - 10:28 AM

Yeah but Doncaster and horse drawn vehicles? If there is no link to travellers then travellers no longer exist as the sign is aimed squarely and accurately.

Back in the'80s when I worked for Wacker who make construction compaction plant we had rules in the depots written in the office and stores.

No credit or cheques from travellers, cash only.

Never leave them on their own anywhere on the premises.

If they bring a machine for repair check the hidden serial number against the stolen list and confirm on the job sheet this has been done.

There were others but these I recall on the notice board.

Mind you this was a long time ago.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 06 Jan 13 - 12:41 PM

Guest:
I think you make the point eloquently:
"No-one on this thread reported seeing signs for years."
I suggest you read through it again.
You are now demonstrating why it is a total waste of time discussing with you.
I know that these signs existed in great numbers throughout the time we worked with them we saw them and experienced their effects. They were a part of our work - we helped list and photograph them for one of the Traveller organisations - our work was passed on to the GLC and helped start to start a move to tackle discrimination of Travellers (until Maggie dismantled it)
Assuming the 'Maggie' you refer to is Margaret Thatcher, she has not been a Member of Parliament since 1992, so you are stating that all the sightings you have recorded were at least 20 years ago.
Others, who disagree with you, state that these signs are not "common in Britain". Can you refute that comment?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jan 13 - 08:22 PM

The forms and marks of discrimination change over the years, and to focus on the forms and the marks that have gone is to risk missing the new forms which replace them.

The notices in the pubs are pretty uncommon today, since they could expose the publicans to serious legal risks. But the absence of a sign doesn't mean the prejudices and the discrimination aren't there. And that's where the attention should be.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 04:48 AM

"....she has not been a Member of Parliament since 1992"
Our direct involvement with attempting to have these signs remove was limited to the period when Ken Livingstone offered the services of the GLC to assist - we continued to see these signs regularly right up to the point when we stopped recording Travellers regularly in 1998.
Can I prove that they are "common in Britain" - no, of course I can't, any more than the handful of people here can prove that they aren't, on the basis of not having seen them.
I have produced evidence that they were still around as late as 2010 and we spoke to Travellers last September who told us that they encounter them regularly, though they point out that they are now found (in the Bristol area at least) to be sited out of the view of casual passers by, inside the bars - we saw one inside one bar and in the porch of another - this in the space of a few miles from one Travellers site
Those who claim otherwise have not produced one single shred of solid evidence to back up their case - if that is not true - please point out something I have missed.
This from the Runnymede Trust pamphlet, 'On the Verge: the gypsies of England', by Donald Kendrick and Sian Bakewell, re-published and expanded by University of Hertfordshire Press in 1995:
"The Commission For Racial Equality and its predecessor, The Race Relations Board received many complaints in particular about pubs with 'No Gypsies' signs outside. Letters achieved 'some success' in the removal of signs but recently new wording 'No Travellers' has been used. Under the Race Relations Act such a sign may be seen as discriminating indirectly against Romany Gypsies. The pub owner would need to justify the sign and a suitable test case is awaited to see how these notices could be justified. Under the Race Relations Act only the CRE can prosecute a discriminator. All that Gypsies can do is refer these signs, and refusals of service and leave it to the Commission to decide which cases to take up.
Notices are becoming more subtle, such as 'Travellers by Appointment only' so that a Gypsy with limited reading skills will see the sign as applying to him, but in cases of prosecution the landlord might get away with arguing that he is referring to commercial travellers."
The problem has not gone away, there is no reason at all why it should, as nobody has shown the slightest concern about this "last acceptable form of racism" apart from a handful of 'seatwarmers' like the Commission For Racial Equality. It has adapted to changing times but it still continues to condemn Travellers to a 'pariah' existence.
Basically, nothing has changed in Britain since MacColl, Parker and Seeger made 'The Travelling People' in the early sixties. That programme played a part in the introduction of the Caravan and Camping Act, which made it obligatory for councils to provide so many sites - (removed by the Major Government - so back to square one)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 05:01 AM

the handful of people here can prove that they aren't, on the basis of not having seen them.
No. Every single contributor, with not one agreeing that they are common.

I have produced evidence that they were still around as late as 2010
Reminder please.

Those who claim otherwise have not produced one single shred of solid evidence to back up their case - if that is not true - please point out something I have missed.

What evidence do you want apart from the actual absence of any signs and the absence of anyone living in Britain who has seen one in years?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 05:02 AM

You state that these signs are common, Jim, and the majority of others say they are not.

The past belongs in the past, and surely everyone here is in complete agreement that such signs and the prejudice which unerpins their use are equally wrong and should be stamped out.

So this long and acrimonious argument is about the veracity or otherwise of your original claim.

A non argument, if ever there was one, since it can be neither proved nor disproved.

If you are going to fight, why not fight the prejudice where it happens, whis is most assuredly not on this forum.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 05:05 AM

MEMO to SELF!

Get new keyboard.

("which is most assuredly")

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 05:14 AM

I know from experience that the terms 'pikey' and 'gippo' etc are totally banned in HM Prisons, (as of course are 'nigger' or 'paki' and any other racist epithet.) Gypsies, travellers etc and all minority-group inmates are protected by the Officers from any racism. Just using the word is punishable by an Adjudication in front of the Governor. Just a small observation, but it shows that even in jail, they seem to be protected and respected by the status quo.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 07:18 AM

Given the length of this thread it would be surprising that no one posting here has reported seeing such a sign recently, if they were 'common'. I suspect we've all been in quite a few pubs.

As the disgusting scenes from Basildon during the Dale Farm evictions demonstrated, their is no shortage of prejudice and worse against Travellers, and the rash of TV entertainment about Big Fat Gypsy Weddings and such is reminiscent of the days of the Black and White MInstrel Show. But that's another matter from the absent pub notices - and one that is far more important.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 08:40 AM

"If you are going to fight, why not fight the prejudice where it happens"
I believe it is common enough to be described as such among the families we know and are still in contact with, even if it has changed its form.
I did not choose this topic - Keith did, no doubt for his own particular agenda. I responded with what I believe to be the facts of the case.
I have 'strayed' to other aspects of Traveller prejudice on this thread only to be told (by guess who, who likes to keep things in his comfort zone) that this is off topic.
There are people here who have never seen these signs - does that mean they have never existed in significant numbers? - hardly. They were certainly prolific when we started recording in the Ladbroke Grove area - your neck of the woods I think - did you ever see them?
I repeat, there is evidence enough that they, or their equivalents are still around in significant enough numbers to be of concern. As far as I'm concerned, whether this is significant enough to be described as 'oommon' is as immaterial as Keith's argument that malnutrition in Palestinian children does not mean they are being 'starved' - the end result is the same; the victims are being dehumanised in order to drive them away.
A footnote - the last time I took part in an argument about Travellers on this forum I ended up having my facebook entry hacked into by a fascist and a somewhat disgusting profile entered - rather proud of that, but it does put the controversies surrounding this subject into context
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Musket
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 08:46 AM

The thing is.. Watch this.

I am of the opinion that there should be signs aimed at the travelling community. Signs to the nearest tax office so they don't accidentally put their tax forms in too late and incur a penalty. Signs to the nearest post office where a system of awareness education can enable them to know this is where you go to get your transit's tax disc renewed. A sign to the nearest health centre where you can get your children vaccinated against the measles outbreaks presently causing issues in the travelling community children, or the high incidence of TB in travelling adults. After all, the last thing you want is to pass these once almost eradicated diseases to others.

Now.. I have no view on today's signs and have given a few older examples I was once aware of. But part of supporting equality for travellers is to support travellers' wish to be equal. I support their right to contribute equally to society in order for society to treat them with the same respect.

No doubt that makes me a monster. However, it does mean that when I sing Freeborn Man, I can have some private irony to chuckle over.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 10:22 AM

I repeat, there is evidence enough ...

Never mind repeating it, how about producing it!
You have had 5 months now.
When is it going to appear, and how do you explain the mass hallucination that prevents any of us seeing them?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 11:05 AM

You've had your proof in plenty Keith - from the Commission for Racial Equality, from the Runnymede Trust, from Councils like Bristol and Canterbury... non of whom would have bothered to mention it if it wasn't a continuing problem - you have neither attempted to disprove or even acknowledge their statements.
You are doing what you do on every thread - making unqualified statements
Don't you dare accuse me of making claims without proof - that is your stock in trade with your Dalek impressions when confronted with proven documented evidence.
If you can't be arsed to read what people put up don't accuse others of 'repeating' anything.
"how do you explain the mass hallucination that prevents any of us seeing them?"
Don't already done that - don't suppose you read that either - the "mass hallucination" of what - a dozen people, proves nothing one way or the other not even a microcosm, never mind a sample of public experience.
Every thread you participate in now underlines you racist bigotry - keep up the good work
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 11:08 AM

BTW
The fact that you have managed to stretch this squalid thread over 5 months and still not produced ne single shred of evidence if proof enough of your racist obsession
WHERE IS YOUR PROOF
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Musket
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 11:40 AM

What is the commission for racial equality? Here in The UK, we have no such body. Is Carroll using historical instances to be seen as the present?

Now why would he do that?




(For everybody else, The Commission for Equality and Human Rights has been around for about five years now. They took over from other bodies charged with overseeing equality. So, it may be safe to add at least five years to any of the Punch and Judy arguing here. Hence Keith's original OP may well stand.)

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 12:44 PM

That post from "Musket," rather demonstrated what I meant about the kind of attitudes that explained the old "No Travellers" signs being very much with us today, even though the signs themselves have generally vanished in the parts of England Mudcatters are familiar with at least. I'm sure their equivalent are still in evidence in too many places around Europe, possibly even in some parts of the UK.

Jim seems to think arguing about whether the signs in pubs are still around is nitpicking. I disagree. It's important to know your enemy, and not fight over the territory they've abandoned. Doing that makes it easier for them to escape effective challenge.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Musket
Date: 07 Jan 13 - 02:29 PM

I'm glad to think it does. I suspect though that you may have missed the point...

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 06:34 AM

""They were certainly prolific when we started recording in the Ladbroke Grove area - your neck of the woods I think - did you ever see them?""

You are partially correct Jim, in that I was born in Chesterton Road, which adjoins Ladbroke Grove, and we later moved, due to bomb damage, to 287 Ladbroke Grove, where I lived until age sixteen, when we moved again to Regents Park.

However, I can't help you with this topic, since I never was much of a pub goer during my first sixteen years.

I don't remember ever noticing any anti traveller signs, but I do remember gypsies, who lived on a site in Latimer Road and used to sell clothes pegs, lavender and heather.

My mother bought all her pegs from them. They never seemed to be unwelcome among our immediate neighbours and several of the men drank in thre "Spread Eagle" just across the road from us.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 07:28 AM

"Jim seems to think arguing about whether the signs in pubs are still around is nitpicking"
No - I believe they are still round in significant enough numbers to be described as 'common' I do believe they are used differently now, but the effect is still the same.
Out of curiosity I made a couple of phone calls last night, the result being I was told that the signs are still appear in South Wales, Cardiff and Swansea were mentioned.
In East London they are not to be seen in the windows of pubs but they appear inside some bars intermittently (ie, if Travellers from a local site start to visit a bar regularly, the signs appear, when they stop the signs disappear until the next time).
The fact is that these signs are still around; how how common or uncommon these signs are is unprovable apart from word-of-mouth experience.
It is our experience that where Travellers stop, these signs appear (it would be ludicrous to claim that they appear in places were Travellers never visit).
That they are there is documented by the councils and human rights and charity bodies who have acknowledged them in order to take action to remove them.
Statistically, there are somewhere between 200,0000/300,000 Travellers in Britain today (%25 are officially homeless - with no legal place to stop)
If our experience is anything to go by, out of the 100s of Travellers we met, we have never encountered a single family who was not aware or had not been effected by these signs - if anybody has any contrary information on this, I would be extremely interested to hear it.
"Is Carroll using....."
Don't know your surname so I can't use it - my first name is Jim and it's how I prefer to be addressed.
"What is the commission for racial equality"
The document from which I produced my quote was published in 1995 - AS I POINTED OUT - nothing has taken place to change the situation since then.
JIM Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 08:15 AM

No-one can stop you saying they are common Jim, but not one contributor agrees with you.
We KNOW they are not common here, because we live here, but don't let us stop you.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 08:44 AM

"No-one can stop you saying they are common Jim, but not one contributor agrees with you."
Nobody can stop you saying they are not common Keith, but you have not produced one single scrap of solid evidence to counter or disprove all the links and quotes that have been put up - not one!!
I know they are common because the people who I worked with and who are affected by them told me they do - they have far less reason to lie about them than you have to make a case taht once again tries to downplay the persecution of an ethnic minority.
You are welcome to put some up now, but I won't hold my breath
As for my "not living here" I had have more experience of Travellers and their way of life in one week that you have had in a lifetime (say this is not the case) so where I live has no bearing on this argument - my experience was in Britain - including four of its major cities. Your Little Britain stance makes you the nasty-minded individual that you appear to be.
You should be aware of not having support for your statements - your latest Palestinian offering was very much a one-man-band but it didn't stop you from making it a solo performance - as for your attack on British male Pakistanis....best not go there eh!
It is no argument to claim that something doesn't exist because a handful of people "haven't seen it" - you would be laughed out of any court in the land
Anyway, I'll leave you yto yout fillibusting.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 08:52 AM

you have to make a case taht once again tries to downplay the persecution of an ethnic minority

Not making a case Jim.
I started this thread to be the evidence you demand.
I had no way of knowing what the experience of all the contributors would be.

Like me, they all know the signs are not common because we live here.
If they were common we would know.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 10:03 AM

"I started this thread to be the evidence you demand."
Grammatical gibberish, but I think I've worked out what you are trying to say.
A dozen or so contributors on a subject that effects a community of 300,000 people is not evidence, it is merely the opinion of a dozen or so people.
I have provided masses of evidence, I have passed on our experiences and those of some of the victims of this racist behavior - you in return have produced nothing - nothing whatever.
You have been given facts and figures (where they exist), you have either ignored them or dismissed them out of hand.
There is not one opinion been put forward here that is backed up by actual evidence of any experience of contact with Travellers - it would have interested me greatly to have been able to have compared notes with anybody who had such experience.
You have been given examples of the findings of people like Donald Kendrick, who dedicated his life to work with Travellers and wrote one of the most important works on Traveller persecution 'The Destiny of Europe's Gypsies' - not worth even an acknowledgement.
I would have expected that people who disagree with my and their argument would at least have read and disputed the documentary evidence - not your style, as you have adequately proved in the past.
I can accept that people have not seen these signs; the opportunity to observe the persecution of a community as small as 300,000 people throughout the whole of the UK is so slight that it would be extremely surprising that they had.
I repeat, it is no argument to claim that something doesn't exist because a handful of people "haven't seen it" - you would be laughed out of any court in the land.
You bring nothing to this argument other than your ongoing racist bigotry.   
Produce some real evidence or you simply have no case.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 10:14 AM

It is no argument to claim that something doesn't exist because a handful of people "haven't seen it" - you would be laughed out of any court in the land
That is only because it is very difficult (if not impossible) to prove a negative.
However, you could prove that these signs are 'common in Britain' if you could provide details of where they may currently be seen.
Proving a positive is much easier, but you consistently fail to do so, relying on historic and/or anecdotal evidence (which is no evidence of the current situation)

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 10:34 AM

Who are you to say, "believe not your own eyes, I will tell you what is true"?

What would you accept as evidence Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,John from Kemsing
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 11:20 AM

Should there be notices of any nature in pubs or other places the question you have ask is "WHY". Pubs, like shops, stores, offices, banks, manufacturing plants etc.,etc. are there to make a business and a living for those owning or being employed in them. If, as result of bad experiences or regular dis-ruption, by particular groups, the owners find their businesses are compromised, their long term regular customers are leaving in droves and their finances are being drained through falling income then surely they have the right to exclude those that they deem to be responsible for the decline in trading.
          There are certain pubs that have been obliged to exclude football supporters because their noisy, un-ruly behaviour, and foul language has driven away local clientelle which the publican would like to see all year round. This is just one example.
          I repeat, the question is "WHY". If your answer to that is "because they are fascist racists etc." then you are not giving reason a chance.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 12:40 PM

"I repeat, the question is "WHY"."
Because it is automatically assumed that Travellers will cause trouble, steal, fight, leave a mess, reduce the value of your property.... It's called racial stereotyping and it underlines the attitude towards Travellers throughout the world.
There is no question that this discrimination did take place - I don't think even Keith would dare deny that; it is a question of to what extent it still exists.
This thread sprang from on discussing No blacks, No Irish signs - taking your logic, why turn away such good customers.
You are quite right Nigel, yet that is exactly what is being done here - "I haven't seen it so it can't exist"
I haven't experienced 'Britain' as a whole, in relation to Travellers, only some of her larger cities (I added two more to that list last night), where I found these signs (last year being the last ones I saw), Taken as a whole, thirty odd years experience was enough to have me believe they wee common, conversations I have had with the victims of these signs shows me that they are still a problem and the documented evidence convinces me that they are a significant enough phenomenon to remain a problem - significant enough to be discussed by councils in order to deal with them.
As I have said, these are a part of what I believe can be described as an ethnic cleansing process.
One quarter of an entire ethnic group officially homeless, a significantly reduced average life span due to the conditions forced on these people, no drinkable water, sanitation, electricity, nowhere to stop long enough to obtain an education or regular work, constant threats of violent attacks, including arson....
One local council spent £8m to move families from a site they had purchased which was originally a rubbish tip to start with and has now returned to being the same - a rubbish tip.
what's the problem in accepting that something as trivial as signs barring members of an ethnic group out of pubs?
"What would you accept as evidence Jim?"
How about the evidence of experience, as Nigel said, "you can't prove a negative".
Your constant repetition of 'I haven't seen one' is proof of something, but certainly not that these signs don't exist.
You have the documented evidence - disprove it or be laughed out of court!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 01:01 PM

Jim, why are you so outraged?

Disagreeing with Keith is hardly a unique state of affairs.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 01:31 PM

"Jim, why are you so outraged?"
Not outraged Al, but Keith's dedication to this topic does allow me to discuss something I feel to be very important
"Never let a chance go by" as Woodie Guthrie once sang
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 04:28 PM

"What would you accept as evidence Jim?"
How about the evidence of experience, as Nigel said, "you can't prove a negative".

So what evidence do you want Jim.
The signs are not here.
Good enough?
Of the thousands of British Mudcatters, not one has seen one for years.
Good enough?
There are no bloody signs!
What is better evidence than that?

If the complete absence of your signs, and the complete absence of a single person who knows where one is to be found is not sufficient evidence, WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU WANT?

You can post out of date links and call it evidence, BUT THERE ARE NO FUCKING SIGNS HERE YOU TWAT!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 05:50 PM

"So what evidence do you want Jim."
I do not want (non) evidence from a serial racist - over and out
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jan 13 - 07:44 PM

I can only re-iterate what I have said before. In my experience such signs are not common. I have neen in a lot of pubs, all over the country for many years, and the only one I have ever seem in respect of travellers was in the Morning Star, Wardley, Mancheter which said 'Travellers Welcome!'

I have no doubt that you are right, Jim, and to travellers who do see the signs they are more common than they should be. But that is no evidence whatsover to say the signs are common. I know you will never agree but I believe that this is all Keith is trying to put across.

I have anecdotal evidence from someone I have no reason to disbelieve that they were made very unwelcome in a pub in Ireland. But I would never say that this is a common state of affairs. Why can you not just accept that to a small section of the population the signs do seem to be common while to the vast majority of us they are not. That way, surely, you are in more of a position to do something about it. If you were to say that a few pubs still display these notices and you would like to see where they are so the issue can be addressed I, for one, would be far more ready to act that if if I was asked to go and tear down thousands of notices that do not exist!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 02:05 AM

1995..

Most travellers weren't born then.   What with low life expectancy and higher than average birth rates.

Perhaps Mr Carroll might try and find a more recent source for his claim?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 04:26 AM

"Perhaps Mr Carroll might try and find a more recent source for his claim?"
I assume this is a (somewhat feeble) attempt at satire - the average life expectancy of Travellers is reckoned as around 10 years less than that of settled people due to the conditions the have to live under.
Wonder if you'd mind oblige with with your surname so I can reciprocate your aggression.
Will answer your points later Dave - busy day.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Brakn
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 04:48 AM

Last time I saw one of these signs was late 80s Ardwick Manchester.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 05:20 AM

Jim, if you are coming back, and not out or over, perhaps you could have another think about what you require as evidence of the absence of signs, apart from the actual absence of the signs.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Allan Conn
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 05:34 AM

Heavens this is going on and on. Unless everyone is telling fibs it seems pretty obvious from the amount of British people on here (presumably we are spread throughout the UK)who have said they have never seen the said sings that they are not 'common' which was the initial suggestion. That does not mean that they didn't exist or don't exist - just that they aren't common! Can't we leave it at that?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: MartinRyan
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 05:38 AM

What fascinates me is the collective need to egg on the punch-drunk protagonists. A kind of abstracted TV-wrestling addiction?

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 05:47 AM

Jim, are you referring to the signs in motorway car parks and lay bys that say -No parking overnight?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 06:02 AM

""Of the thousands of British Mudcatters,""

Such wild exaggeration does tend to cast considerable doubt on the credibility of everthing else you say Keith.

""If the complete absence of your signs, and the complete absence of a single person who knows where one is to be found is not sufficient evidence, WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU WANT?

You can post out of date links and call it evidence, BUT THERE ARE NO FUCKING SIGNS HERE YOU TWAT!""

Could it be that the mask of calm urbanity is slipping, to reveal the somewhat less appealing personality beneath?

I am sure that I'm not the only member who will take with a very large pinch of salt, the oft repeated claims the Keith A is always polite and deals with issues, not personalities.

I've no dog in this fight, but it does seem a non argument. I haven't seen any such signs in many years, but I don't draw conclusions from that because it may simply be that I don't frequent the same pubs as the travelling community.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 06:16 AM

At last I've found evidence that these signs are not common.

On the first page of this discussion there's a link Ice Rink - No Travellers sign
In that link it states:
"This manager has definitely got it wrong. It is very rare to see this because people have learned it is discrimination. It is sad in this day and age," said Hughie Smith, life president of The Gypsy Council, who added that the sign was "inflammatory, illegal and in danger of inciting racial hatred." The refusal to serve someone based on their race, nationality or ethnicity is in breach of the UK Equality Act 2010.

Jim, Do you accept Hughie Smith as a credible witness?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 06:39 AM

Don, I am only human.
Everyone has a breaking point.

Jim kept demanding evidence, but would not say what evidence he wanted.

We all know that the signs are not "common throughout Britain."

How do you deal with someone who just denies an obvious truth, insulting and abusing you while he does it?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 06:57 AM

How do you deal with someone who just denies an obvious truth, insulting and abusing you while he does it?

From 'Desiderata'
Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story.
Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexatious to the spirit.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 08:32 AM

Wise words.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 12:10 PM

Huh. The last time Mr Carroll had my surname he challenged me on my assertion that a viable definition of a folk song was any song sung in a folk club. Be buggered to get into other arguments with him. Most on this thread know my surname. It is written on signs in pubs...

Life expectancy and engaging with health services have a correlation you know... so does a tax funded health care system and people paying tax.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 01:37 PM

This gets crasser and crasser.
A handful of people here have said they do not believe these signs are common because they have not seen them - no other reason, but that.
Nobody has proffered the information as to what contact they have had with Travellers, whether they have spoken to any of them, whether they live in the proximity of a Travellers site, whether Travellers move through their area regularly; just that they have not personally seen them - no context, no background information, just that.
A few have said that they have witnessed these signs in the past, but most have not claimed to have ever having seen them.
I know they were common up to the mid-nineties in London, in Birmingham, around Norwich, Liverpool, Manchester - all areas we recorded in. I saw them regularly, I photographed them and even included one of them in the booklet to our Travellers CD (see photo in sleeve notes of 'From Puck To Appleby' on the Musical Traditions thread.)
Throughout the time we worked and socialised with Travellers we chose the pubs we drank in on the basis of which we could be servef them - most in the proximity of the sites we visited carried 'No Travellers' signs.
We wren't alone in seeing them; Geoff Wallis's review of that CD on the fRoots site reads:   
"It may be 2003, but the window of a pub just a couple of hundred yards from my front door still carries the sign "Travellers By Appointment Only" and they don't mean salespeople from the snacks industry"
They were included in various radio productions by MacColl, Charles Parker, and in films by Phillip Donellan - yet few people her have said they ever saw them personally.
I've produced links to references to the existence of these signs throughout this bizarre argument.
After this thread started we visited Somerset; we saw these signs inside and outside pubs in the Bristol area and we were told in no uncertain terms the they were still a major part of Travelling life.
This was reiterated by family members of some of the people we recorded two nights ago by Travellers who have family in London and South Wales.
What proof do I want - how about, a reason why I should take the word of a small number of people who apparently have had no contact with Travellers whatever (if they have had, I'm sure they would have mentioned it before now) over people whose lives it affects, and others, organisations like The Runnymede Trust, Race Relations organisations, and even councils who have deal with it?
I have no doubt that there aren't as many signs as there were in the 80s; on the other hand, there aren't as many Travellers on the road as there were then, many having been driven off the road by State and racism and general hostility - but in proportion, there are just as many per Traveller family as there ever were and their effect is as degrading as it ever was.
I am led to the conclusion that wherever Travellers travel they are met with refusal of service and the most common manifestation of this is notices refusing service.
I have never been mugged; I can't recall knowing anybody who has ever been mugged, and I certainly have never witnessed a mugging.
It would be arrogant in the extreme if I were to claim that mugging is an uncommon crime on the basis that it had never happened to me.
Thank you Nigel Parsons for providing the only single piece of solid evidence that ahs been presented on this thread that these signs are rare . I met Hugie Smih on several occasions when he lived in Battersea. At the time, his organisation The National Gypsy Council represented only English "true" Gypsies; the Irish and Scots Travellers were not represented and were forced to set up their own body 'The London Roadside Travellers' – it was this organisation we worked with as the Irish and Scots were treated somewhat as a scapegoat group "not real Travellers".
It may be true that the effect of this discrimination it less on 'Gypsies', but his claim doesn't apply to those we know and are in contact with.
By the way - the only person I have been abusive to here is Keith, who is, I believe a racist who has used several threads to advocate that racism - he and I have a history which is not likely to change in the foreseeable future.
I have called nobody a "twat", I have only suggested that anybody has told lies in return for having been accused of same, and I have not disparaged anybody by referring to them in a sneery or dismissive manner.
Glass houses and stones, eh what!!
Jim Carroll
PS Not punch-drunk Martin - just warming up, but thanks for caring!

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 01:51 PM

PPS Keith
I think you will find that the jury is still out on whether anybody who claims that all male British Pakistanis are culturally inclined to having underage sex, can be described as "human"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 02:10 PM

Nobody has proffered the information as to what contact they have had with Travellers, whether they have spoken to any of them, whether they live in the proximity of a Travellers site, whether Travellers move through their area regularly; just that they have not personally seen them - no context, no background information, just that.

Very disingenuous of you Jim. For the record I proffered the information that not only was there a Gypsy site in proximity of the Morning Star but that my Uncle had close dealings with the travelers themselves. But, in case you missed that, I can also update and add to that.

There is a travelers site not 10 minutes walk from where I live - here. and plenty of support for the traveling people from our community. My local is one of the nearest pubs to the site but there at least a dozen or more others in close proximity and not one of them has ever turned a traveler away let alone had such a notice.

Over the years I have traveled the length and breadth of the country myself - Not stopping in a caravan but hotels and B&Bs for my job and I always make sure I visit a local pub and, if possible , try the local ale. I estimate that I must have visited upwards of 500 pubs over the years and never seen such a thing. I can only comment about the proximity to traveling communities where I know, as I have said, but in my mind such notices are not common.

Yet I am still willing to accept the premise that they are more common than they should be and, were I a traveler, I would notice them more. You, however, seem to be working on the basis that if it does not fit with your dogma than it must be wrong. You will not commit to a figure that is agreed as common - 1%? 10%? 20%? What? The only evidence you provide is anecdotal and hearsay and yet everyone that disagrees with you is a racist bigot! Come on, man. Give it up. I know it sticks in your throat but this time Keith is right.

Oh, and you never did supply the responses you promised after my last note.

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 02:46 PM

"Very disingenuous of you Jim."
Profuse apologies Dave; I intended to say "hardly anybody" - I don't think you were alone in making such a statement; I seem to remember Jack Campin and CS wrote something similar - apologies to them too - and to whoever else it may concern
Cheers back
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Jan 13 - 07:09 PM

Not to mention me Jim, in a direct response to your question about Ladbroke Grove.

The list expands.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 06:30 AM

"The list expands."
Not far enough to be conclusive Don, and certainly not far enough to contradict any of these.
Jim Carroll
Selection of quotes - all linked, dated (where possible) and all from either research or experience.
They correspond with my own knowledge and experience of the subject.

2011
"Although race relations legislation has been in force in the United Kingdom since 1965 and has developed considerably to protect against increasingly subtle forms of discrimination, Gypsies and Travellers are still experiencing discrimination of the most overt kind: 'No blacks, no Irish, no dogs' signs disappeared decades ago, but the 'No Travellers' signs, used intentionally to exclude Gypsies and Travellers, are still widespread, indicating that discrimination against these groups remains the last 'respectable' form of racism in the United Kingdom. This is supported by the findings of a 2003 Mori poll conducted in England in which 34 per cent of respondents admitted to being personally prejudiced against Gypsies and Travellers."
http://www.gypsy-traveller.org/your-rights/law/harassment-and-discrimination/

Leicestershire 2004
"There is much evidence of severe and continuing discrimination in education, health, employment and contact with the criminal justice system. This undermines Gypsies and Travellers ability to live ordinary lives and to access services equally. The former Chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE), Trevor Phillips, said in 2004 that:
"Discrimination against Gypsies and Travellers appears to be the last 'respectable' form of racism. It is still considered acceptable to put up 'No Traveller' signs in pubs and shops and to make blatantly prejudiced remarks about Gypsies and Travellers."
http://www.leicestershiretogether.org/gypsy_travellers_the_truth.pdf

Bristol Council (undated but later than 2006)
"There are still "No Travellers" signs in some pubs and shops, where Gypsies and Travellers face suspicion and extra scrutiny by security guards"
http://www.bristol.gov.uk/sites/default/files/assets/documents/Myth%20busting%20booklet%20on%20Gypsies%20and%20Travellers.pdf

Newarrk and Sherwood Community Voluntary Service (supported by Nottinghamshire County Council and Sherwood District Council 2013
"Discrimintation of Gypsy and Traveller Communities
The Traveller community faces harassment and discrimination on a daily basis as a result of negative stereotypes and deeply ingrained cultural prejudges. Unfortunately, many instances of harassment and discrimination go unchallenged because they are subtle and indirect. However, there are ways to counter harassment and discrimination and there are specific instances when it can be successfully challenged........
Direct discrimination happens when and individual or body (such as a brewery, shop or a service provider, etc…) openly discriminates against an individual or group because of who they are. Examples of this would be things like a pub or shop putting a sign on the door say 'No Travellers.' "
http://www.nandscvs.org/Health-and-Social-Care/Traveller-Health-Worker/Discrimintation-of-Gypsy-and-Traveller-Communities.cfm


Cheshire Halton and Warrington Racial Equality Council 2006
"The last four years have seen a significant increase in the numbers of Gypsies and Travellers seeking our help.
Around half of our casework enquiries each year are now from Gypsies and Travellers, who have encountered discrimination, harassment and abuse. However, our role isn't only about helping individuals - a large proportion of our work is about campaigning for the rights of minority ethnic groups. And out of all the groups, Gypsies and Travellers clearly remain the most marginalized and openly vilified. We no longer see 'no blacks' or 'no Irish' signs, but 'No Gypsies' and 'No Travellers' signs remain commonplace in Cheshire's pubs, bars and shops – racism towards them is still seen as acceptable to the majority population"
http://www.chawrec.org.uk/documents/resources/research/Here%20to%20Stay.pdf

Commission for Racial Equality 2005
"'But the harsh reality is that Gypsies and Travellers face disadvantage and discrimination in almost all walks of life – including in key public service areas such as accommodation provision and planning, education, health, employment and criminal justice. Recent research shows that the public hostility to Gypsies and Travellers is unmatched by that shown towards any other community – even asylum seekers and refugees. Decades ago 'No blacks, no Irish, no dogs' signs in pubs and shops were commonplace – thankfully times have changed – however, sadly 'No Travellers' signs are still widespread.
Trevor Phillips
CRE Chair"

Travellers Times 2006
"No Travellers? No Way!
Businesses that put up 'No Travellers' signs are being targeted by North Wales police and the Commission for Racial Equality. The force is the first in the country to take direct action on racist signs.
"They are not acceptable in North Wales," said police officer Geoff Richardson, "and we want to get rid of the discrimination that underlies these notices."
http://travellerstimes.org.uk/downloads%5CTT29_05042009215333.pdf

Commission Fror Racial Equality (written circa 2005, dated 2013)
All the evidence shows that Travellers and Gypsies are some of the most vulnerable and marginalised ethnic minority groups in Britain. 'No Travellers' signs in pubs and shops can still be seen today, and councils no longer have a statutory duty to provide sites for Gypsy and Traveller families, spending small fortunes each year evicting them, instead. Gypsy and Traveller children are taunted and bullied in school, local residents are openly hostile to them, and scare stories in the media fuel prejudice and make racist attitudes acceptable.
http://www.journeyfolki.org.uk/Community/HelpResources/CommissionForRacialEqualityCRE/tabid/832/language/en-US/Default.aspx

Commission for Racial Equality East Midlands, Peterborough and Cambridge Regions 2007
Some common examples of racism and racist behaviour were given:
Signs outside chips shops and pubs saying "No Travellers Allowed"
Police cars using their sirens outside camp sites at 3am every night until a Liaison Officer
reported this to the Chief Inspector
Police continually doing stop and search on Gypsies and Travellers when they see them in
the street
Security guards following Gypsies and Travellers around shops
http://humanrightsandequalitiescharnwood.aj-services.com/uploads/Gypsy_Report.pdf

Commission for Racial Equality report 2006
Introduction
Gypsies have been a part of British society since the 1500s, Irish Travellers since the 1800s. Yet their relations with others in the communities where they live or pass through are often so poor that they lead separate, even parallel lives. Unlawful 'No Travellers' signs persist, and hostile media reports fuel tensions over unauthorised encampments and developments, and reinforce local opposition to proposals for legal sites.
Police officer's statement
[This] is a very racist community ... the local population has an extreme perception of Gypsies and Travellers ... people feel that Gypsies and Travellers are thieves, liars, dirty, dishonest and don't pay their way, spongers and aggressive. There are No Traveller signs outside pubs ... and parents threatening to withdraw their children from the local school if Gypsies' and Travellers' children came into it ... they see Gypsy and Traveller children as almost an infection. ... a parish council told me their residents live in fear of Gypsies.
http://www.lancsngfl.ac.uk/projects/ema/download/file/commonground_report.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 07:28 AM

Jim:
You may wish to reconsider using the Newark example.
The wording: Direct discrimination happens when and individual or body (such as a brewery, shop or a service provider, etc…) openly discriminates against an individual or group because of who they are. Examples of this would be things like a pub or shop putting a sign on the door say 'No Travellers.' " does not give evidence for the presence of such signs. It just states that such signs (if used)would be illegal.

Cheers

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 07:40 AM

Maybe Nigel - and the rest?
Thanks for reading them BTW
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 08:14 AM

I think you've made your point. I'll take the word of the Lancashire police. Jim - you're right. We're wrong. We just don't notice the signs, because they don't involve us.

I always thought the 'BY APPOINTMENT ONLY' referred to travelling salesmen who arrived at inopportune times.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 08:15 AM

The big problem, it seems to me, is the fact that the general public cannot distinguish between the genuine Roma, the traditional non Roma traveller community, and the self styled "New Age Travellers", who have no tradition, having just dropped out of society in the 1960s, and who are probably the authors of most of the problem behaviour.

The fact that these three discrete groups are lumped together in the public consciousness is unfortunate.

As I said Jim in answer to your question, I came into contact with travelling people as a lad, and nobody seemed to have any distrust or dislike for them.

However, they were almost exclusively Roma, many still inhabiting horse drawn Vardos, and when they moved on periodically from the piece of unused ground where they customarily stayed, you wouldn't know they had ever been there.

They were mostly welcome visitors, as were the "gentlemen of the road" (tramps), who periodically appeared and did a few odd jobs in return for a meal or two.

That world vanished with the start of the swinging sixties.

Contrast that with modern scenes of stripped down cars and rubbish scattered along grass verges and lay bys, and add in pub brawls and general mischief, damage to farm land etc.

I'm not even sure that one can apply the term racist to comment about travellers who are UK born drop outs.

The presence, or absence, of the signs is quite unproveable and serves merely to divert attention from what are the real concerns of the travelling community on the one hand and the settled community who are vulnerable to any misbehaviour on the other.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 09:44 AM

Interestingly the Travellers Times (page 12) linked to above: http://travellerstimes.org.uk/downloads%5CTT29_05042009215333.pdf
gives advice on how to deal with such signs if seen. This includes reporting them to the local police, the CRE, and the local licensing authority. (and, if necessary opposing the re-issue of a license)
If more people took this sort of action then evidence of these signs would start showing up in official documentation.(and possibly the newspapers)

Jim: you said "where I found these signs (last year being the last ones I saw), " If it was that recently, did you report them?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 02:31 PM

Al,

I'll take the word of the Lancashire police. Jim

Is that the same Lancashire police that tazered a blind man because they thought his white stick was a Samuri sword?

I'd pick my evidence very carefully if I was looking at them I think :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 03:37 PM

"If it was that recently, did you report them?"
From above:
" No I didn't - I learned from bitter experience that:
A The police do not act on such reports - see my account of reporting a proposed fire bomb attack on Traveller families on Mitcham Common. B Such reports can often lead to harassment of Travellers by police and an escalation of prejudiced activity by local businesses.
And most importantly:
C The Travellers we know prefer to deal with it in their own way...."
You have a description of what can happen to Travellers who stick their heads above the parapet."
This is why I have never been specific in discussing sites on this thread
(A) I reported a proposed fire bomb attack on a site on Mitcham Common (told to me by a workmate) to the police, who, after a week, had not taken any details and had not taken any action.
Luckily I was able to contact a local Traveller activist who took steps to prevent the attack.
A policeman knocked on our door three weeks later to enquire what we were doing consorting with Travellers.
(B) Have already linked a site describing what happens to Travellers who step out of line and make a nuisance of themselves.
I saw the aftermath of one of the police 'dawn raids' of a site that didn't cough up for the 'Police Benevolent Fund' at Dog Kennel Hill, South East London, back in the seventies.
One of the closest friends we had among Travellers made a bit of a nuisance of himself. His young teenage son was detained 'in connection with a burglary', driven up to the North of England, released without charge (or even interview) and left to make his own way back to London - sans money, change of clothes, transport.
(C) Our involvement with Travellers, beyond recording songs, stories, folklore and oral history, was in taking some photographs and helping with filling in a few forms. We believed that Traveller politicking is best done by Travellers - the ones we knew agreed.
Outside of that, we were happy to pass on an account of the friendship and sometimes overwhelming generosity of the people we met and explaining to people the predicament Travellers find themselves in today (which is why I've stuck with this thread as long as I have).
Sorry to be such a bore.
Don;
Much of what you say I have some sympathy with.
New Age Travellers are not included in the accounts I have posted - as far as I know there is no documented evidence of their numbers, behaviour, motivation.....
As far a the mess you describe; much of it stems from the fact that there are insufficient permanent sites.
We found that the authorised halting sites which Travellers could identify as 'home' were looked after and kept in reasonable order (certainly the case on the excellent facilitated sites in Bristol and the first one we ever visited in Swindon .
Travellers who camped illegally and were then evicted after the statutory 14 days were hardly likely to look after the waste ground which they occupied for that period.
Of course, as with settled people, there were/are dirty, messy Travellers, but in general permanent dwellers self policed their sites (and they had the benefit of authorised rubbish collections).
I suggest you take a peep at what has happened to Dale Farm since the eviction (which, I repeat, cost the taxpayer 8m).
Back in the 80s a spot check of the Garret Lane site in Wandsworth by the police and a couple of gypsy activists found that all the dumped cars and most of the hard rubbish; (washing machines, TVs etc) had been dumped by locals who used the Travellers presence as an opportunity to get rid of their unwanteds
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Jan 13 - 08:18 PM

Jim, are you familiar with the axiom ""It isn't what's true, it's what's perceived to be true"".

If travellers move on leaving rubbish, what will convince those who have to clear it that it isn't their rubbish?

Whether it is or isn't, is largely immaterial.

I have been a camper, and lately a caravanner, for most of my 72 years on this planet. When I leave a site at the end of a holiday, I leave it clean. No rubbish, mine or anybody else's to be mistakenly attributed to me.

When, on holiday, I visit pubs, shops, or local amenities, I behave myself as society would expect.

New Age Travellers as a group fall seriously short of that level of responsibility, and I suspect that your excluding them from your calculations doesn't alter the fact that the general public aren't equipped to make that distinction.

Blame therefore falls, albeit unfairly, on all travelling people.

Just the way things seem to work in the real world.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 02:26 AM

Don mentioning camping and caravanning reminds me, , having a caravan myself..

There are many camp sites, set up for holidaying families who have policies of no transit vans and no caravans made by the company Hobby.

I last saw such a sign at a site on the outskirts of Cambridge last year.

Granted the exclusion of large vans denotes a preference for holiday makers rather than people using their caravan for working away, as getting up and making a noise early is not good. But a Hobby? The choice of travellers. .

Not the blatant discrimination Mr Carroll waffles on about in error but convenient and perhaps in the spirit?

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 02:55 AM

Jim, I deplore discrimination against any ethnic group, not least the Travelling community.

I was with you on the preceding thread until you stated that such signs "are common throughout Britain."
I was certain that was not true, challenged and was called a liar.
In big, red capitals.

I do not claim there is not a single one.
That would be silly. Someone could go out with a pad of Post It notes anytime.
But, the signs are not "common throughout Britain."

You have a history of denigration against Britain.
You even tried to use the Syria thread as a platform for it.
As ever when I challenge your nonsense, I am a racist and a bigot and every other nasty thing.

The fact is that you live in a country that persecutes Travellers mercilessly, but you choose to throw shit at us who do not.
Not to anything like the extent that it happens in Ireland.
And, we all know that the signs are not common here.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 04:04 AM

Don; I have no intention of defending something I don't approve of myself - I know that that rubbish is part of the Traveller problem, but only part of it.
I suggest that the solution lies in recognising the situation that Travellers find themselves in today and whether demonising and degrading them is the way to go - I wold suggest that the solution lies in both the settled and the Travelling communities giving ground and trying to understand each other.
This remarkable article was published in The Times on the eve of the Dale farm eviction - (never thought I'd turn to a Rupert Murdoch publication to make a case)

"1,000 years of prejudice, hatred and distrust
There are few tales that begin in the Indian sub-continent and Irish marshlands during the first millennium after the birth of Christ and reach Basildon in Essex 1,000 years later.
In between there are travels through eastern Europe, Irish famines and Nazi killing camps. Then there are the prejudices, the disputes and the clashing of communities. The history of the 300,000-strong travelling communities, now encamped on 8,000-plus pitches in England, is complex.
First, there are the groupings: the Roma, who are believed to have emerged from Asia 1,000 years ago and to have split into the Romany of western Europe, the Domari of the Middle East and Eastern Europe and the Lomavren of Central Europe.
The Irish Travellers refer to themselves as Pavees and share a common language, Shelta. A study earlier this year provided DNA evidence that it is a distinct ethnic minority, which separated from the settled Irish community between 1,000 and 2,000 years ago. Previously, it was believed that they were landowners who took to the road during the Great Famine. In 2000, they were ruled to be a distinct ethnic group, while Gypsies gained this status in 1976.
Then there are the New Age travellers whose crusty roots lie in the hippy culture of the mid-20th century. One can also throw in a sprinkling of Scottish Travellers, with their own musical and linguistic traditions dating back to the 12th century, and the Travelling Showpeople who have entertained generations with their fairgrounds and circuses.
Gypsies were one of the ethnic groups targeted by the Nazis. At least 250,000 were killed in the Holocaust."

"And, we all know that the signs are not common here"
Obviously not "all" - you've had the evidence that they are common wherever Travellers travel (more than enough) - you have deliberately chosen to ignore what has been available to you from the beginning of this thread and have obviously decided to continue on that course.
If you have a scrap of evidence to make your now totally scuppered case - feel free, you have failed to present any so far, otherwise, please go away.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 07:02 AM

your now totally scuppered case

My case was that they are not common throughout Britain, and that is the case.
This thread is the evidence.
Everyone on this thread except you knows that they are not common throughout Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 07:22 AM

""I suggest that the solution lies in recognising the situation that Travellers find themselves in today and whether demonising and degrading them is the way to go - I wold suggest that the solution lies in both the settled and the Travelling communities giving ground and trying to understand each other.""

Precisely Jim, and arguing back and forth about the number of signs simply distracts from what is really important.

Better far to say "O.K. Keith, WHATEVVAH!"

Then we can all forget about the symptom, and concentrate on the attitudes which are the disease.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 08:41 AM

"arguing back and forth about the number of signs simply distracts from what is really important."
Now that this has been established beyond doubt I couldn't agree more
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 08:55 AM

Established beyond doubt that they are common throughout Britain?

If you believe that, you are on your own.
On Planet Jim per?
Meanwhile, back in on Earth, they are still invisible.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: MartinRyan
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 09:15 AM

Hmmm....

I wonder if Max could install a script so that whenever the main protagonists in this "discussion" posted, their comments were automatically converted to "Yah, Booh, Sucks!" - which is what they amount to.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 09:56 AM

""Established beyond doubt that they are common throughout Britain?""

Always guaranteed to misinterpret, eh Keith?

Jim was answering my post in which I pointed out that the number of signs was a triviality and the signs themselves only a symptom of what we ought to be discussing.

But you knew that already and just wanted the chance for another dig at Jim.

Which says much about your real reasons for appearing as an opponent in any thread to which Jim posts comment.

Now, isn't it time to shut down this nonsense/

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 10:24 AM

Yes I am done, but that is what Jim meant.
No misinterpretation.
Ask him.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 10:43 AM

Jim Carroll 11 Jan 13 Time 04.04

Quote: "I know that rubbish is part of the Traveller problem"

"Traveller problem" Is this not an example of the racism that Jim so vehemently objects to. Well I'll be damned, I think it is.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 11:34 AM

"Is this not an example of the racism that Jim so vehemently objects to."
Society in general creates waste; the settled community is organised so as to be able to cope with that fact - the Travelling community does not have that luxury (persistent refusal by councils to remove rubbish - or even by firms to rent out portable toilets)
Methinks you are trying to score points by making something from a fully recognised and long-standing problem.
Please explain.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 11:52 AM

Jim, I have your numerous threads on this an other matters. You have an seemingly endless ability to turn other people words to your own end and portray them as "racist bogots". You mentioned a "traveller problem" of your own free will. If you who so readily defends this group see them as a "problem" then they could probably do without your help.

Just for the record I haven't seen a "No Travellers" sign in many, many years. In that time I have lived in Cambridgeshire, Oxfordshire, Caernavonshire, Cumbria, Yorkshire and Lancashire sometimes in cities sometimes in rural locations. Like other people here I do not deny they exist, they probably do, and they should be objected to at every opportunity but they are not common.

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 12:44 PM

Anonymous Guest:
I pointed out that rubbish was a Traveller problem - the fact that they are unable to dispose of it for the reasons I outlined is, as I say, a long accepted fact and in no way reflects on Travellers an ethnic group
If you care to read through their own publications, they say as much themselves.
You seem to be indulging in the same exercise of 'word turning' that you are accusing me of - is that really all you can come up with?
As for the signs - you have had the quotes - take it up with the ones that made them - just passing on the message.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: 'NoTravellers'common UK sign?
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jan 13 - 02:23 PM

Jim, you categorically stated that "rubbish is part of the traveller problem" not that travellers have a problem with rubbish.

But hey, don't beat yourself up because of a hint of racism in your statement. You are a product of all that you have encountered.

As Britain is (as all other countries are) a racist society it is not surprising that no matter how hard you try not to be racist that occasionally the veneer will slip.

You will show, as unfortunately we all do to some extent,the nurturing that we absorb as we grow and mature.

Underneath your concerns for the travellers you, like everyone else, has a degree of racism in you.

This does not make you a bad person and your support for a minority that has been and is still abused does you credit.

But perhaps you should be a little easier on people who have not had the interaction with the travelling community that you have had.

They too are not bad people, they may lack the knowledge you have acquired in all the years working with, and for, travellers but as you will no doubt be aware fear and ignorance of a people or community is enough the create racism.

Sleep well.