17 2 mins 14 yrs

The Commission for Racial Equality really is a draconian iniquity, a goverment  created blunt instrument aimed at discriminating against the indigenous White community. Consider this;

As part of his election campaign to win a council seat, Carl Lewis started a petition to evict travellers from an illegal caravan park. He spent hours circulating leaflets that highlighted the problem of the ‘itinerant travellers’ and his concerns struck a chord with residents. Last night the CRE announced it was launching legal proceedings against Mr Lewis because it believes his campaign material is racially discriminating. His petition – which secured almost 1,000 signatures before he handed it over to Swansea Council – reads: "Petition against any proposed itinerant travellers’ site within Llansamlet and the Swansea Vale area." The CRE, which receives £ 19million funding from the Government every year, claims the use of the term ‘itinerant travellers’ in his campaign material breaches section 31 of the Race Relations Act.

Lucky he didn’t call them Gypsies then.

So, if they are not "itinerant travellers", what ARE they, exactly? Mobile Irish caravaners? Domestically disadvantaged Romani? Nomadically inclined non-tax payers? It’s a disgrace that Mr Lewis is persecuted in this way.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

17 thoughts on “JUST AS WELL HE DIDN’T SAY GYPSIES!

  1. I prefer ‘pikie scum’ myself.

    Viz once published a comic strip "the dirty thieving gypsy bastards". After the usual complaints from the race hustling industry, it changed the name to "the good kind and honest gypsy bastards". Heh.

    That Chris Myant of the CRE is clearly a wrong’un in any case. He looks so unhygienic and badly dressed, he could be a school teacher.

    Mr Lewis should call this inadequate parasite’s bluff and demand his day in court.

  2. It should be made possible for victims of the CRE (and the organisation that will be replacing it in a couple of weeks time) to have scum like Chris Myant charged personally with bring malicious prosecutions.

  3. The term itinerant was introduced in the seventies because the word Tinker was deemed to have negative connotations. After a while the term itinerant was felt to have negative connotations too and the term traveller was used.

    Now, sadly, the term traveller has come to have negative connotations.

    Isn’t it clear by now that the words aren’t really the problem and the association with criminality comes from the behaviour of people within the travelling community.

    Indulging the fantasy that we are dealing with an ethnic culture has let to wrong options being taken by the travellers themselves and the agencies that deal with them.

    The state must insist on traveller children receiving an education. That is the only way to break the cycle and there can be no exceptions and no excuses.

    I would support lavish spending on this project as it would save us all a lot in the long run while offering the chance of a decent life to future generations of travellers.

  4. Henry,

    The council built halting sites as you know and one that I know of was destroyed – partly by vandals but mainly by the travelling people themselves. Not so long ago we had families move into car parks and holiday sites. This site that I know of had showers and kitchens were caravans could stop – people could wash and cook. Before the site went up it was possible to see people parked at the side of the road on a freezing December morning getting washed in a bucket or from a stand pipe, children running all over the road and the mess…….

    As I understand it, the way of life is about being on the move. There was one school I know of provided for travelling children. This meant that children could go to it when they were in the Belfast area and then move on. I don’t know what happened to it, falling numbers perhaps but it’s gone now.

    What ever the soloution is – I would assume it’s difficult, I just don’t see why money should be thrown at it again and again, when people decide the way they want to live is this way. The best soloution is good halting sites that have a watchman or someone to look after it. It’s difficult to legislate for children to go to school when one minute they are there and the next they are gone. Crime with travellers is a huge problem, the weddings can be a disaster.

  5. TYPHOO

    I share your frustration and that is why I believe the nomadic lifestyle should not be accepted as an excuse for raising another generation without an education.

    Every benefit given to a travelling family should be condtitional on the children turning up for school.

    On halting sites I have a quick and easy solution. Privatise them. Let the owners charge for their use and provide the necessary facilities. Then enforse the law on illegal encampments and parking of caravans on public roads.

    This is fantasy politics of course because the idea of privatising halting sites would be enough to send the liberal readership of the Irish Times in to a fit of indignation.

  6. Henry94

    However tinker/itinerent/traveller/ were meant to be used isn’t really the point in this case.

    The very point is to demonstrate to Carl Lewis and all of us that the state will only allow certain views to be held. Pikies aren’t the point and Carl Lewis just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. He’s merely the nominated victim.

    No, this matter is about the extension and expansion of state powers and the crushing of individual liberty. Petty tyrants like Myers cannot abide the idea of others wishing to live their lives as they see fit, so those others must have the force of law brought down on them in order to correct their views and behaviour. If the law doesn’t fit their plans, they’ll seek to change it, as Myers is doing.

    The only just outcome is for the court to consider the CRE’s application before ordering Myers and Trevor Philips to appear before the court for a dressing down. There they can be reminded that in the United Kingdom the state is the servant of the people, before being sent down for malfeasance.

  7. Henry, the problem isn’t whether or not any proposed site should be private or not. It’s the simple fact that the vast majority of people are only too aware of what living close to large numbers of gypsies entails. Hence the petition by Mr Lewis. Would you want them in a field close to your house?

  8. Guardian Apostate

    Everybody has to be somewhere. I have had my dealings with Travelers over the years and some experiences have been good and some not so good.

    I have no sympathy for people who use abusive language towards them and I have no sympathy for those who romanticise them

    My concern on the issue is to change the conditions under which they live by helping them to make better choices through education.

    I don’t really care about Carl Lewis and his inability to express himself properly.

  9. Moving from place to place with no fixed home does not make you part of any particular racial group. Martin Luther king once said that he dreamed of a day when people would be judged "by the content of their character" which is exactly what Carl Lewis has done and he described them in neutral, objective terms that were factually correct.

  10. I don’t really care about Carl Lewis and his inability to express himself properly.

    Thursday, September 27, 2007 at 01:51PM | Henry94

    So Henry, how is the term ‘itinerant traveller’ incorrect? I’m just curious.

  11. Allan

    The term traveller is perfectly acceptable where I come from. It is how the community involved refer to themselves.

    The term Intinerant is considered offensive. If it is the same in England then I can see why it was deemed unacceptable. I don’t know why Lewis choose the word or if he was aware of the offence it could cause.

  12. Henry, when I go back and forth to/from Norway, I’m a ‘traveller’. Can we not allow terms to be used which distinguish the likes of me (and you hopefully) from the itinerants who leave mess behind them wherever they go. And since when was ‘itinerant’ offensive?

  13. Allan

    You might as well ask why happy people like ourselves can’t use the word gay anymore. It’s just the way things are.

    I try not to use language which people find offensive and I don’t feel the need to ask them why they find it offensive. It’s enough that they do.

Comments are closed.