Dambusters

by **LANDROVER ROGER** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 3:46 pm

Why do a re-make.The original is still superb.

by **Bobbie En Tejas** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 3:48 pm

I agree with them.

Obviously the word doesn't have the same connotation there as it does here. You don't have to be an old hippy or politically correct to hate the word. I am deeply offended by it and cringe every time I hear it. The feelings on it are very deep-seated and not a brand new thing. It is one of the most disparaging words you could use for a whole group of people, so why use it.

And I'm not jumping on you Martin. Just think you don't understand about it.

by **Martin** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 3:54 pm

That's ok Bobbie, I respect your thoughts on that. You see, I was brought up on the word, it has never bothered me, but we are moving away from the big issue....the dog's name was Nigger....historical fact.

by **Martin** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:00 pm

by **ionnsaigh** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:19 pm

Offensive terms may be historical fact
I think what has prominence - over fact - is consideration for the feelings of others - take account before crying fact.
I personally cringe with anger and embarrassment at Racism . Nigger is a racist term, Racism is a historical fact - the word nigger is Racism in action.
A member of the human race.

by **Tom B** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:23 pm

ionnsaigh wrote:Offensive terms may be historical fact
I think what has prominence - over fact - is consideration for the feelings of others - take account before crying fact.
I personally cringe with anger and embarrassment at Racism . Nigger is a racist term, Racism is a historical fact - the word nigger is Racism in action.
A member of the human race.

...but "pigs" is OK?

by **Martin** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:26 pm

by **Martin** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:27 pm

by **ionnsaigh** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:38 pm

Pigs are animals, what would you both call Nigger??? Because I have absolutely no idea what a nigger is.
I mean a pig is a pig. so what's a nigger? . please inform.So then I can reply -to both your rather poor attempts - at some form of unwanted and entirely unnecessary - oneupmanshipism.

by **LANDROVER ROGER** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:59 pm

Would it have been easier to leave the dog`s part out of it?I don`t think that the Labrador actually piloted the plane.

by **Martin** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:03 pm

by **Martin** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:09 pm

by **ionnsaigh** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:11 pm

And believe you me if the dog had a choice - the last name would be nigger .
thon flag is fer gein me the boak son. :lol:

by **LANDROVER ROGER** » Wed Oct 01, 2008 5:13 pm

Martin wrote:Landrover Roger, My late mother dined with Guy Gibson at the Petswood Hotel, Woodhall Spa, the former officers mess for 617. She always said that Gibson spoke very highly of his dog, brought it into the topic of conversation frequently.
So, no, don't leave the dog's part out of it. If the dog was meant to be forgotten then there wouldn't be a well tended grave at RAF Scampton.

Good point.I think that I can understand why you have such a passion to have the re-make 100% true considering your family involvement.

Dambusters

Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Re: Dambusters

Who is online