Come sweet bombs and fall on the house of commons!

[Jon_in_london]

It isn't fit to rule the country now...........

MPs have voted to exempt themselves from the Freedom of Information Act. The act that THEY voted in and applies to just about every other public body.

And the commons was empty! EMPTY!

Where the bloody hell was everybody? Where were the libDems? Where was Broon? Where was Cameron?

Nowhere. Couldn't even be bothered to turn up. If they aren't voting in one rule for themselves and anther for the rest of us, they are getting plastered and smoking away in that grotty little pub they have in parliament.

What a bunch of self-serving, smelly, crusty areseholes! They aren't fit to lick the stinky white gunge I pick out from under my toenails once a month! I'm so going to write to my MP about this... hells teeth! he only lives down the road. I'm having to restrain myself from walking down to his house right now in my underpants and thumping on his door and giving him a piece of my mind.

I swear I haven't been this angry for a loooonnnngggg time! And they complain about poor voter turn-out? WTF!?

I'm f$^%ing LIVID

Where the hell is Oliver Cromwell when you need him?

/rant

[Architect]

one-eyed porridge-wog


Oh look. Our little racist friend is back.

[Big Les]

And invoking good ol' Ollie Cromwell too. Cos he was a good egg really.

He's right about the exemption though. Fecking unbelievable. The example given by the numpty proposing it was a situation he had "heard of" involving applications by the BNP to find out about new race-related legislation. Hardly convincing stuff.

The MPs just couldn't resist I guess. Lots of bluster on the floor, but when it came to brass tacks, a 71 majority.

Never mind Cromwell, bring back Guido!

[Tony]

one-eyed porridge-wog?

[Big Les]

Yes. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=2610111#post2610111)

[geni]

It isn't fit to rule the country now...........

MPs have voted to exempt themselves from the Freedom of Information Act. The act that THEY voted in and applies to just about every other public body.


Not yet. Still got to get through the lords.


And the commons was empty! EMPTY!

Where the bloody hell was everybody? Where were the libDems? Where was Broon? Where was Cameron?


Slight lack of a debate to attend. Total of one speach in support and while the oposition threw in a few good lines it was mostly an attempt filibustering which avoiding is understandable.



If they aren't voting in one rule for themselves and anther for the rest of us, they are getting plastered and smoking away in that grotty little pub they have in parliament.


Parliament has a number of very nice bars.

[Tony]

Yes. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=2610111#post2610111)

I wasn't doubting whether he said it, but was asking what the hell it was supposed to be. I've never heard the term.

[Big Les]

If you read that thread, you'll see that it's a new (or at least little-known) compound insult comprising:

Wog - racist slang for a black person (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wog), from days of Empire. Note that the Scientologist *spit* usage of the word derives from the US Navy term pollywog - nothing to do with racism.

and...

Porridge. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porridge) Bland if nutritious and filling white goo eaten throughout Scotland, the UK, and no doubt beyond (as I'm sure you know). Chosen in this instance for its traditional association with Scotland.

See also "Green wog" or "Bog wog" as current racist slang for an Irish person.

[geni]

The MPs just couldn't resist I guess. Lots of bluster on the floor, but when it came to brass tacks, a 71 majority.


The oposition knew they would lose a vote. So bluster was their only option.

[MelBrooksfan]

I wasn't doubting whether he said it, but was asking what the hell it was supposed to be. I've never heard the term.

Evidently, it's a derogatory term for the Scots.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=porridge+wog&defid=288228

[Jon_in_london]

I claim the Robert Mugabe defence!

{Ok I retract and apologise for the porridge thing, for some reason it struck me as funny - sorry}

[mr rosewater]

Now put on your pants, and clean your toes more often.

[SteveGrenard]

Wog - racist slang for a black person, from days of Empire. Note that the Scientologist *spit* usage of the word derives from the US Navy term pollywog - nothing to do with racism.

I also thought the term wog was a racist acronym for "Worker On Government service" ....which described workers in more poorly paid jobs such as bus conductors and which were taken by immigrants mainly from India and also from Africa. Er, a pollywog is a child's term of endearment for a tadpole or the free swimming aquatic larval form of frogs and toads. I guess the U.S. Navy could call frogmen pollywogs....

[This Guy]

The term Pollywog (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polliwog) is used in the Navy (US) for anyone that has not sailed across the equator.

Once you do cross the equator, you are a Shellback (if you go through the initiation).

[fuelair]

It isn't fit to rule the country now...........

MPs have voted to exempt themselves from the Freedom of Information Act. The act that THEY voted in and applies to just about every other public body.

And the commons was empty! EMPTY!

Where the bloody hell was everybody? Where were the libDems? Where was Broon? Where was Cameron?

Nowhere. Couldn't even be bothered to turn up. If they aren't voting in one rule for themselves and anther for the rest of us, they are getting plastered and smoking away in that grotty little pub they have in parliament.

What a bunch of self-serving, smelly, crusty areseholes! They aren't fit to lick the stinky white gunge I pick out from under my toenails once a month! I'm so going to write to my MP about this... hells teeth! he only lives down the road. I'm having to restrain myself from walking down to his house right now in my underpants and thumping on his door and giving him a piece of my mind.

I swear I haven't been this angry for a loooonnnngggg time! And they complain about poor voter turn-out? WTF!?

I'm f$^%ing LIVID

Where the hell is Oliver Cromwell when you need him?

/rantActually, if I believed in the xtianity thing, I would assume he is still busy burning in hell. (I am not a fan, if that was unclear in any way!)

[Architect]

I claim the Robert Mugabe defence!

{Ok I retract and apologise for the porridge thing, for some reason it struck me as funny - sorry}


As predicted, the racist begins his back pedalling.

Tell me, Jon, do you often using disparaging racist language? Are you seriously trying to tell us that, despite widespread the accepted unacceptability of the term "wog" throughout the UK, you were unaware that it was deeply offensive?

Do you similarly deploy the N word?

[Architect]

I wasn't doubting whether he said it, but was asking what the hell it was supposed to be. I've never heard the term.

This is what it means.

[Big Les]

I also thought the term wog was a racist acronym for "Worker On Government service" ....which described workers in more poorly paid jobs such as bus conductors and which were taken by immigrants mainly from India and also from Africa.

No - that's one of many "backronyms" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backronym) for the word, usually invented to make it seem more innocuous (ie less racist).

Er, a pollywog is a child's term of endearment for a tadpole or the free swimming aquatic larval form of frogs and toads. I guess the U.S. Navy could call frogmen pollywogs....

As has been said, the Navy took the word and applied it to mean "rookie", "newbie" etc. Hence it's not racist in that context.

[SteveGrenard]

Big Les wrote: As has been said, the Navy took the word and applied it to mean "rookie", "newbie" etc. Hence it's not racist in that context.

It's not only not racist in "that context", it is not racist in any context since it is not technically the same word: pollywog doesn't equalwog. ....unless, of course, you choose to make it so. And that would be a mistake.

I can see where pollywog could mean "newbie" or "rookie" as that is what tadpoles are: developing new frogs.

So before somebody invented "worker on government service" for the term wog, where did it come from? origin? basis?

[Architect]

So before somebody invented "worker on government service" for the term wog, where did it come from? origin? basis?

This should explain everything:

http://www.billcasselman.com/wording_room/wog_one.htm (http://www.billcasselman.com/wording_room/wog_one.htm)

[malbui]

See also "Green wog" or "Bog wog" as current racist slang for an Irish person.


I was amusingly called a "Frog Wog" on a recent trip to London. Good to see the ignorant and racist at least being creative.


<derail>

The absolutely best bit of random abuse I've had from a stranger occurred in Melbourne last year, though. I was quietly strolling back to my hotel near the river when a girl walked up to me and called me a "f**king four-eyed c**t". And there was me thinking the Australians were not a perceptive bunch.

</derail>

[SteveGrenard]

This should explain everything:

http://www.billcasselman.com/wording_room/wog_one.htm (http://www.billcasselman.com/wording_room/wog_one.htm)

Thanks. Very interesting. Wikipedia has a similar discourse, including the following for pollywog (or polliwog). This origin of the meaning of the term may trump all others, e.g. tracing it to middle English:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wog

Polliwog or pollywog is an increasingly obsolete synonym for tadpole which has been traced back to Middle English

[Architect]

Either way, it's still unacceptably racist.

[SteveGrenard]

Either way, it's still unacceptably racist.


Okay. Calling a tadpole a pollywog is racist then. Thanks.

[Architect]

Let me rephrase that;

The context in which Jon used it was unacceptably racist.

[Big Les]

Big Les wrote:

It's not only not racist in "that context", it is not racist in any context since it is not technically the same word: pollywog doesn't equalwog. ....unless, of course, you choose to make it so. And that would be a mistake.

I meant the shortened version; "wog", not "pollywog". Seperate derivations, therefore one is racist (dependent somewhat upon context), the other cannot be.

I can see where pollywog could mean "newbie" or "rookie" as that is what tadpoles are: developing new frogs.

Very perceptive. But with respect it doesn't matter whether you see it or not; that's the origin (of the navy version of "wog".)

So before somebody invented "worker on government service" for the term wog, where did it come from? origin? basis?

See Architect's link. It almost certainly derives from Golliwog. These creative acronyms are almost always retrospective. e.g. GOLF (gentlemen only, ladies forbidden) or POSH (port out starboard home). It almost definitely has nothing to do with your acronym. Acronyms are a recent thing anyway.

[SteveGrenard]

See Architect's link. It almost certainly derives from Golliwog. These creative acronyms are almost always retrospective. e.g. GOLF (gentlemen only, ladies forbidden) or POSH (port out starboard home). It almost definitely has nothing to do with your acronym. Acronyms are a recent thing anyway.

I read the link, thanks. I also provided another link which traces the term pollywog to middle-English, which predates the golliwog term. It's all very fascinating but confusing if I detect that sense in the links' authors correctly.

Pollywog contains the offensive term "wog" in its construct but that doesn't make the word pollywog racist.

There are two countries in Africa with the n-word embodied in their name (with one "g")....that doesn't make the names of these countries racist because of it.

[Darat]

...snip...

Pollywog contains the offensive term "wog" in its construct but that doesn't make the word pollywog racist.


...snip...

And no one has said it does.

[Big Les]

I read the link, thanks. I also provided another link which traces the term pollywog to middle-English, which predates the golliwog term. It's all very fascinating but confusing if I detect that sense in the links' authors correctly.

Pollywog contains the offensive term "wog" in its construct but that doesn't make the word pollywog racist.

There are two countries in Africa with the n-word embodied in their name (with one "g")....that doesn't make the names of these countries racist because of it.

I'm afraid you're suffering a comprehension failure here. I introduced the "pollywog" mention (purely for interest's sake) with this sentence:


Note that the Scientologist *spit* usage of the word derives from the US Navy term pollywog - nothing to do with racism.

Pay special attention to the last five words.

[SteveGrenard]

Note that the Scientologist *spit* usage of the word derives from the US Navy term pollywog - nothing to do with racism.

I accepted your statement that the US Navy use of the term pollywog has nothing to do with racism. I did not accept it derived from a racist term, golliwog or that wog was necessarily derived from pollywog.



Thanks. What does "spit" usage of the term mean exactly? Thanks again.

I think my point was that before there was a U.S. Navy even, let alone a US Navy that used the term pollywog to describe a subset of its sailors, the
term pollywog existed and continues to exist describing a tadpole.

In the reference given golliwog, a children's book term, was definitely a racist term and there was a mention above that pollywog derived from golliwog implying both are racist therefore.

[Big Les]

I accepted your statement that the US Navy use of the term pollywog has nothing to do with racism.

OK.

I did not accept it derived from a racist term, golliwog

Again, no-one said that it did!

or that wog was necessarily derived from pollywog.

In the NAVAL context, all available evidence suggests that it is. For example. (http://www.daisy.freeserve.co.uk/wog_faq.htm) But AGAIN, that version is not racist - think of them as two separate words that are spelled the same.

Thanks. What does "spit" usage of the term mean exactly? Thanks again.

That was simply me expressing my distaste for scientology.

I think my point was that before there was a U.S. Navy even, let alone a US Navy that used the term pollywog to describe a subset of its sailors, the term pollywog existed and continues to exist describing a tadpole.

Bloody hell man, read what I wrote! That's exactly what I was saying!!!!!

In the reference given golliwog, a children's book term, was definitely a racist term and there was a mention above that pollywog derived from golliwog implying both are racist therefore.

Care to point that out to me? Because I can't see it. Seriously, we are saying the same thing.

[Zep]

<derail>

The absolutely best bit of random abuse I've had from a stranger occurred in Melbourne last year, though. I was quietly strolling back to my hotel near the river when a girl walked up to me and called me a "f**king four-eyed c**t". And there was me thinking the Australians were not a perceptive bunch.

</derail>Out of sheer curiosity, care to elaborate on this? Also, it sounds like she was off her face on illicit pharmaceuticals. Such falls from grace happen here more frequently than some of us want to accept, I'm afraid...

[Architect]

That happened to me once, in Carlisle railway station. 20 seconds later I passed two police officers, and I've rarely seen anyone arrested quite as rapidly. Breach of the peace, if I recall correctly.

Not that I took any gratuitous pleasure from it, you understand. :D

[Ziggurat]

Thanks. What does "spit" usage of the term mean exactly? Thanks again.

My guess is that the "*spit*" wasn't connected to the word "usage", but rather was used to suggest that saying the word "Scientologist" made his mouth feel foul, requiring him to spit (the asterisks indicating an action and not a spoken word) to clean it out.

[malbui]

Out of sheer curiosity, care to elaborate on this? Also, it sounds like she was off her face on illicit pharmaceuticals. Such falls from grace happen here more frequently than some of us want to accept, I'm afraid...


There's not much more to tell... as I said, I was walking towards one of the bridges across the Yarra when the charming young lady, who was maybe 20, changed course to walk towards me and greet me. Not wanting to get involved in anything less than 12 hours after I'd arrived in the country, I merely thanked her for her kindness and kept on going - it's certainly possible that she was under the influence of something but I didn't stop to ask for a blood test to be performed.

[Jon_in_london]

Tell me, Jon, do you often using disparaging racist language? Are you seriously trying to tell us that, despite widespread the accepted unacceptability of the term "wog" throughout the UK, you were unaware that it was deeply offensive?


Offence was aimed purely at a certain PM-to-be and members of his party. Not other Scots - to whom my apology was aimed. I'm afraid my hatred of Brown (and 12 tins of Youngs Special), may have clouded my judgement somewhat.

[brodski]

Offence was aimed purely at a certain PM-to-be and memebrs of his partty. Not other Scots - to whom my apology was not aimed. I'm afraid my hatred of Brown (and 12 tins of Youngs Special), may have clouded my judgement somewhat.

The Mel Gibson defense?

[Darth Rotor]

Let me rephrase that;

The context in which Jon used it was unacceptably racist.

Explain unacceptably? Where? Or, are you being redundant?

DR

[Architect]

Offence was aimed purely at a certain PM-to-be and members of his party. Not other Scots - to whom my apology was aimed. I'm afraid my hatred of Brown (and 12 tins of Youngs Special), may have clouded my judgement somewhat.

And you consider the use of the word "Wog" acceptable, do you?

[Architect]

Explain unacceptably? Where? Or, are you being redundant?

DR

If you are suggesting that the phrase implies that there is such a thing as "acceptable" racism, then you need to learn more about the Scottish dialect. I suspect that you would have preferred me to say "unacceptable and racist" or somesuch.

[gtc]

when a girl walked up to me and called me a "f**king four-eyed c**t".

In Melbourne, that counts as foreplay.

:D

[Lord Muck oGentry]

I claim the Robert Mugabe defence!

{Ok I retract and apologise for the porridge thing, for some reason it struck me as funny - sorry}


No need to apologize. When this porridge-wog heard the word, he laughed so hard he damn-near filled his breeks.

[Darth Rotor]

If you are suggesting that the phrase implies that there is such a thing as "acceptable" racism, then you need to learn more about the Scottish dialect. I suspect that you would have preferred me to say "unacceptable and racist" or somesuch.

If you had simply said racist, I think "unacceptable" can be easily inferred. If you use "unacceptable" it seems to imply a possibility of "acceptable" which on this topic, seems a bit hard to fathom, and thus I asked if you were being redundant.

It is still the English language, regardless of dialect. ;)

DR

[Lothian]

Offence was aimed purely at a certain PM-to-be and members of his party. Not other Scots - to whom my apology was aimed. I'm afraid my hatred of Brown (and 12 tins of Youngs Special), may have clouded my judgement somewhat.This was discussed at the recent JREF get together in Edinburgh. While some people were shocked to find out that he only had one eye, no-one admitted to being offended by the term which caused a good chuckle all round.

[Architect]

This was discussed at the recent JREF get together in Edinburgh. While some people were shocked to find out that he only had one eye, no-one admitted to being offended by the term which caused a good chuckle all round.

How do you know I'm not coloured. ;)

[Lothian]

How do you know I'm not coloured. ;)I know because coloured is an offensive term.

From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coloured)"In a British context "coloured" has also been used to refer to black people, although this is now regarded as an old-fashioned and somewhat offensive usage."

[brodski]

I know because coloured is an offensive term.

From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coloured)"In a British context "coloured" has also been used to refer to black people, although this is now regarded as an old-fashioned and somewhat offensive usage."

Quite, I remember the complaints when Nelson Mandela used the term "coloured" in a UK tv interview (On GMTV IIRC).

[Architect]

[sigh] I can see the irony is lost



unless you're winding me up!

[Lothian]

[sigh] I can see the irony is lost



unless you're winding me up!No, having complained about a racist comment I saw irony in you using one.

However, I didn’t think it was deliberate. Sorry if I got it wrong.

[Rolfe]

This was discussed at the recent JREF get together in Edinburgh. While some people were shocked to find out that he only had one eye, no-one admitted to being offended by the term which caused a good chuckle all round.
I remember saying I found the term offensive, but was not personally offended by it - in fact I laughed like a drain. Mainly at such a classic pin-on-a-board example of knee-jerk English rascism turning up just hours after I'd mentioned the existence of such on another thread.

Come on guys, Jon has apologised. The thread is about the vote to exempt MPs from the FIA, which I agree is scandalous.

Discuss.

Rolfe.

[Darat]

I remember saying I found the term offensive, but was not personally offended by it - in fact I laughed like a drain. Mainly at such a classic pin-on-a-board example of knee-jerk English rascism turning up just hours after I'd mentioned the existence of such on another thread.

...snip...


I heard an example of the converse on an early evening BBC TV programme last week about demolitions, a Scottish bloke said (not exact words) "What could be a better job for a Scot - being paid to demolish England".

[Lothian]

I remember saying I found the term offensive, but was not personally offended by it - in fact I laughed like a drain. Mainly at such a classic pin-on-a-board example of knee-jerk English rascism turning up just hours after I'd mentioned the existence of such on another thread.

Come on guys, Jon has apologised. The thread is about the vote to exempt MPs from the FIA, which I agree is scandalous.

Discuss.

Rolfe.In theory the FOIA is a good idea. In practice however there are problems. The number of requests means that rather than doing what they are paid to do MPs are, at our expense, wasting their time digging out information for journalists hunting for a story.

I am not against the act but I think their needs to be a balance. Perhaps some initial sifting system where the reason for the FOI request is considered. I have no problem with a request where there are good reasons.

[Darat]

...snip...

I am not against the act but I think their needs to be a balance. Perhaps some initial sifting system where the reason for the FOI request is considered. I have no problem with a request where there are good reasons.

I thought there was already some provision for that?

ETA: There is this sort of thing:

http://www.foi.gov.uk/yourRights/handlingrequests.htm#5
Vexatious and repeated requests

The Act does not specifically limit the number of requests you can make. However, the Act states that a public authority does not have to comply with vexatious or repeated requests. This may include repeated requests from the same person for the same information, or requests which are intended to disrupt the authority's work.


A list of the various exemptions:http://www.foi.gov.uk/yourRights/exemptions.htm

[Rolfe]

I heard an example of the converse on an early evening BBC TV programme last week about demolitions, a Scottish bloke said (not exact words) "What could be a better job for a Scot - being paid to demolish England".
Oh yes, it's by no means a one-way street. And of course the side making the remark thinks it's obviously a joke, while the other side takes violent offence.

I have here in my hot little hand a book purchased yesterday entitled Scotland vs. England - what will they do without us? You'd have a fit, I'm afraid. (I only went to the bookshop to buy a birthday present for a friend's son, and while the staff were trying to find a non-shop-soiled copy of a Scottish football compendium, plucked from the sports shelf, they tried the "local interest" shelf, and while the footballing book wasn't there, the racist rant was, and I'm afraid I succumbed.)

Opening at random:

Jokes about their language aside, why feel compassion for the English when laughing at them is just as much fun?

And consider this - it may be that the sole purpose of the English in life is to serve as a warning to others.

There are jokes against the Scots there too. Can we call it a draw and get back to abusing the FIA vote?

Rolfe.

[Lothian]

I thought there was already some provision for that?

ETA: There is this sort of thing:No. There are exemptions, but these concern reasons why the information is not suitable to be released. These fall into two categories. Absolute exemptions and qualified. The former doesn’t not have to be released the later needs a further public interest test.

However each document needs to be considered. It follows that an FOI request could come in, and nothing released, however someone has had to look over hundreds of documents and make and record a decision on each one.

However requests can be refused if they will take too long.

It is free to submit an FOI request as long as it can be completed in three days.
I am not aware of anything to stop someone submitting at our expense lots of 2 day searches. I don't see the limits you refer to stopping the press.

[brodski]

I can see two very good reasons for this amendment, firstly MPs generally do not have the resources to adequately manage FOI systems. Anyone who has had to deal with FOI requests, and has seen eth resources your average MP has at their disposal will understand this.

Secondly there is a matter of confidentiality. Many people write to their MPs asking them to help them out in very sensitive matters, and understandably do not want those letters or their response to become part of the public record.

Note that this change does not apply to the actions of Government, which is carried out largely outside of parliament.

On the criticism that the Chamber was empty for this vote, that is only an issue if you misunderstand how parliament actually works.
Most debate, discussion and public analysis of legislation happens in committee, not in the Chamber, and this vote was already a foregone conclusion, so why should MPs waste time in eth Chamber when they could be doing much more useful work?
Is the OP a call for symbolic gestures over actual substance?

[Darat]

I can see two very good reasons for this amendment, firstly MPs generally do not have the resources to adequately manage FOI systems. Anyone who has had to deal with FOI requests, and has seen eth resources your average MP has at their disposal will understand this.


That's just an operational issue - it could easily be resolved.


Secondly there is a matter of confidentiality. Many people write to their MPs asking them to help them out in very sensitive matters, and understandably do not want those letters or their response to become part of the public record.


Not too sure about this - he/she is a MP a public representative if I write to him/her as a public representative then sorry it is a matter of public record. (I still beleive Enoch Powell made his "converned constituent" letter up!)

[brodski]

That's just an operational issue - it could easily be resolved. If you can resolve it easily I know of several major departments that would offer you a job. ;)


Not too sure about this - he/she is a MP a public representative if I write to him/her as a public representative then sorry it is a matter of public record. (I still beleive Enoch Powell made his "converned constituent" letter up!)

I believe that Powell invented her as well, much as Mary Whitehouse invented the “disgusting and depraved” thing she saw on the BBC one evening.

However I think that people often in desperate need of help and advocacy would be much less willing to seek it if their MP could not offer them confidentiality.

If MPs want to make up stories about “concerned constituents” all they need to do is claim that they turned up to surgery rather than wrote to them.

[Darat]

If you can resolve it easily I know of several major departments that would offer you a job. ;)

...snip...

I did say it could be easily resolved - however the Civil service is ever so slightly protective of itself and is notorious for not making sensible changes (albeit very good at making it look like it has made changes...) - not surprising when you know where all the bodies are hidden.

[Lothian]

Not too sure about this - he/she is a MP a public representative if I write to him/her as a public representative then sorry it is a matter of public record. (I still beleive Enoch Powell made his "converned constituent" letter up!)I think it would probably be exempt from release, but it still needs to be searched and considered.