"Pubs for all you racists"

[RonJeremy 10]

A group of around eight came in our local pub a few weeks ago, men, women and children, a girl of around ten years was walking around the pub trying to sell bracelets made out of Loom Bands, by the time they had gone, the mess they left had to be seen to be believed, the kids had had a McDonalds and the containers were just thrown on the floor, crisp packets joined them. After they left it was noticed a large brass acting of a horse and cart which had stood in the same place for fifteen years had gone. The reputation the Gypsys have has not been invented, it's through their actions and way of life. I'm 100% behind the chap that banned them from his pub.

 

Oh dear. Oh dear. Don't you know you're not allowed to speak the truth.

You will be rounded upon by the nutty far left brigade on here.

[loraward 10]

Whats more ridiculous about this is that the manager didn't just stop travelers entering the pub, they refused entry to groups of delegates including a police inspector, a barrister and a priest that was attending a conference next door, so the pub manager treated everyone equally, therefor not discrimination.

 

 

 

Mr Willers said that Mr Watson, who was then a serving police officer but has since retired, produced his warrant card and asked if the manager would explain what was going on.

 

At this point, the group claim that a third doorman appeared and explained that entry was barred because of problems after the same conference last year.

 

The group were eventually allowed into the pub - on condition that Mr Watson 'vouch for' and 'keep an eye' on them - but later walked out and joined others waiting outside.

 

Irish traveller Pauline Anderson, a trustee of the charity who works in primary education for Sheffield City Council, told Judge John Hand QC that being turned away 'upset' her.

 

'I was told that nobody from the conference could be allowed into the pub. The doormen were not allowing entrance to anyone who had been at our conference,' she said.

Edited May 20, 2015 by loraward

[Harrystottle 10]

A group of around eight came in our local pub a few weeks ago, men, women and children, a girl of around ten years was walking around the pub trying to sell bracelets made out of Loom Bands, by the time they had gone, the mess they left had to be seen to be believed, the kids had had a McDonalds and the containers were just thrown on the floor, crisp packets joined them. After they left it was noticed a large brass casting of a horse and cart which had stood in the same place for fifteen years had gone. The reputation the Gypsys have has not been invented, it's through their actions and way of life.

 

My son used to work in a pub and had exactly the same type of experience on more than one occasion.

 

A lot of venues won't entertain the idea of having gypsy wedding parties either - why do you think they are turning money down? Because of the trouble that comes with them.

[waldershelf 10]

A genetics expert from the University of Edinburgh disagrees with your assumption that they are not an ethnic or racial group.

 

Apparently DNA tests have proven that they are in fact different from the 'settled community'.

 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishexaminer.com%2Fireland%2Fhealth%2Fdna-study-travellers-a-distinct-ethnicity-156324.html&ei=iJpbVffLM8Wa7gaQhYLICw&usg=AFQjCNFmg8dXodD-LxrmENl-oc7jhBTRtg&bvm=bv.93756505,d.ZGU&cad=rja

 

That however is not the point here, the landlord made a decision based purely on prejudice and without any of the people he refused to serve having committed any actions to deserve being singled out for the treatment.

 

Did you read the OPs link?

 

In addition to travelers the group who were refused service included a police inspector a barrister and a priest.

 

Asking someone to leave who is causing trouble or refusing someone entry who has done so in the past is perfectly reasonable but deciding not to serve people because you disagree with their lifestyle isn't.

 

Obviously, that does not apply to football supporters who can be discriminated against, herded like cattle and refused entry to pubs or stadiums purely on a whim.

 

What a load of codswallop, the landlord made a decision based on what happened at the same event the previous year.

 

"Travellers DNA diverged from settled communities between 1000 and 2000 years ago". That's not the bulk of the traveller population, whatever their background not many of them have been travelling for more then a few generations, the main difference between "them and us" is their complete and utter disregard for the rule of law, travelling allows them the freedom to rob, steal and disrupt wherever they turn up without working and paying their dues and demands like the rest of us do.

 

Lets be quite sure who we are referring to here, white, Caucasian, mostly northern European people who have made a lifestyle choice, not ethnic Gipsies which are a distinct racial group that originate in northern India. I'm not suggesting the Romany population is without issues, especially those recently arrived from eastern Europe but that's a different discussion.

[mjw47 10]

What a load of codswallop, the landlord made a decision based on what happened at the same event the previous year.

 

"Travellers DNA diverged from settled communities between 1000 and 2000 years ago". That's not the bulk of the traveller population, whatever their background not many of them have been travelling for more then a few generations, the main difference between "them and us" is their complete and utter disregard for the rule of law, travelling allows them the freedom to rob, steal and disrupt wherever they turn up without working and paying their dues and demands like the rest of us do.

 

Lets be quite sure who we are referring to here, white, Caucasian, mostly northern European people who have made a lifestyle choice, not ethnic Gipsies which are a distinct racial group that originate in northern India. I'm not suggesting the Romany population is without issues, especially those recently arrived from eastern Europe but that's a different discussion.

 

The landlord barred people who had nothing whatsoever to do with what took place the previous year.

 

How would you like to be barred from a pub whilst on holiday because some people from your country/town had caused trouble the previous year?

 

What evidence do you have to support your assertion that ' not many of them have been traveling for generations'?

 

These people haven't made a 'lifestyle choice' no more than other people make 'lifestyle choices', they were born into a particular group and have lived accordingly.

 

Were they to make a choice it would involve them altering their way of life wouldn't it?

 

DNA is science which has been tested and proven, enough to have people convicted in a court of law on it's evidence.

 

This link provides you with Dr Jim Wilson's background regarding his work on DNA.

 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cphs.mvm.ed.ac.uk%2Fpeople%2FstaffProfile.php%3Fprofile%3Djwilson7&ei=rJlcVdKBA8mdsgGdioGQBQ&usg=AFQjCNGhEmB-WQt_5GrU-35wQnaXUGXpQA&bvm=bv.93756505,d.bGg&cad=rja

 

You dismiss his findings because they don't agree with your prejudices, perhaps you would care to enlighten us as to exactly what your qualifications are for feeling that you know better?

 

There is definitely codswallop involved and you are the purveyor of it.

[retep 68]

The landlord barred people who had nothing whatsoever to do with what took place the previous year.

 

How would you like to be barred from a pub whilst on holiday because some people from your country/town had caused trouble the previous year?

 

What evidence do you have to support your assertion that ' not many of them have been traveling for generations'?

 

These people haven't made a 'lifestyle choice' no more than other people make 'lifestyle choices', they were born into a particular group and have lived accordingly.

 

Were they to make a choice it would involve them altering their way of life wouldn't it?

 

DNA is science which has been tested and proven, enough to have people convicted in a court of law on it's evidence.

 

This link provides you with Dr Jim Wilson's background regarding his work on DNA.

 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cphs.mvm.ed.ac.uk%2Fpeople%2FstaffProfile.php%3Fprofile%3Djwilson7&ei=rJlcVdKBA8mdsgGdioGQBQ&usg=AFQjCNGhEmB-WQt_5GrU-35wQnaXUGXpQA&bvm=bv.93756505,d.bGg&cad=rja

 

You dismiss his findings because they don't agree with your prejudices, perhaps you would care to enlighten us as to exactly what your qualifications are for feeling that you know better?

 

There is definitely codswallop involved and you are the purveyor of it.

 

Not so much codswallop just not enough proof.

 

"in 2011 an analysis of DNA from 40 Travellers was undertaken at the Royal College of Surgeons in Dublin and the University of Edinburgh.

 

The study provided evidence that Irish Travellers are a distinct Irish ethnic minority, who separated from the settled Irish community at least 1,000 years ago.

 

However, not all families of Irish Travellers date back to the same point in time; some families adopted Traveller customs centuries ago, while others did so more recently.

[Halibut 12]

Not so much codswallop just not enough proof.

 

"in 2011 an analysis of DNA from 40 Travellers was undertaken at the Royal College of Surgeons in Dublin and the University of Edinburgh.

 

The study provided evidence that Irish Travellers are a distinct Irish ethnic minority, who separated from the settled Irish community at least 1,000 years ago.

 

However, not all families of Irish Travellers date back to the same point in time; some families adopted Traveller customs centuries ago, while others did so more recently.

 

In answer to your bold, so what? Still a case of blatant discrimination based on who they were, not what they had done.

[retep 68]

In answer to your bold, so what? Still a case of blatant discrimination based on who they were, not what they had done.

 

So if I take to a caravan does it make me one of the travellers by ethnicity??

[Halibut 12]

So if I take to a caravan does it make me one of the travellers by ethnicity??

 

No, but if you were barred from a pub because you lived in a caravan you'd feel pretty peed off would you not?

[mjw47 10]

Not so much codswallop just not enough proof.

 

"in 2011 an analysis of DNA from 40 Travellers was undertaken at the Royal College of Surgeons in Dublin and the University of Edinburgh.

 

The study provided evidence that Irish Travellers are a distinct Irish ethnic minority, who separated from the settled Irish community at least 1,000 years ago.

 

However, not all families of Irish Travellers date back to the same point in time; some families adopted Traveller customs centuries ago, while others did so more recently.

 

Some families centuries ago and some others more recently.

 

That doesn't detract from the DNA evidence showing that the core group have a difference in genetic makeup to the rest of the population.

 

In order to state that this difference occurred 1,000 to 2,000 years ago the two university's must have been satisfied that there was some evidence to that effect, presumably this took the form of some element of their DNA which was unique to that specific group and not present in the general population.

 

Although the travelers sample group was small the information on the general populations DNA is extensive, therefore an anomaly which was present in all of the traveler DNA and was absent in the general population would show a difference.

 

All presumption on my part but it seems logical as two universities have backed the claim.

 

Anyway it is irrelevant to the central point, which was that people who had caused no problem were refused service because some different people had previously caused a problem.

 

The law backed their case and Tim Martin apologised, case closed in their favour.

[loraward 10]

No, but if you were barred from a pub because you lived in a caravan you'd feel pretty peed off would you not?

 

Why would you want to support a business owner that doesn't like you?

 

Surely if the local pub landlord let it be known that they hate you, you would simply find another pub to drink it.

[retep 68]

No, but if you were barred from a pub because you lived in a caravan you'd feel pretty peed off would you not?

 

Not if I made myself part of a trouble causing group, I'd expect it.

 

---------- Post added 20-05-2015 at 17:19 ----------

 

Some families centuries ago and some others more recently.

 

That doesn't detract from the DNA evidence showing that the core group have a difference in genetic makeup to the rest of the population.

 

In order to state that this difference occurred 1,000 to 2,000 years ago the two university's must have been satisfied that there was some evidence to that effect, presumably this took the form of some element of their DNA which was unique to that specific group and not present in the general population.

 

Although the travelers sample group was small the information on the general populations DNA is extensive, therefore an anomaly which was present in all of the traveler DNA and was absent in the general population would show a difference.

 

All presumption on my part but it seems logical as two universities have backed the claim.

 

Anyway it is irrelevant to the central point, which was that people who had caused no problem were refused service because some different people had previously caused a problem.

 

The law backed their case and Tim Martin apologised, case closed in their favour.

 

You'd need more than 40 samples to prove it.

 

If the landlord presumed it was a similar group of people who had given him grief, he had every reason to refuse.