A tale of barclays... one honest man in a company full of lies

savagej

Yes, yes, anything you say BM, take a wee read of this and then come back with another answer as an apologist for what Barclays do and have done in Africa and then I can post another link, and so on and so forth:-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2848046.ece

Inactive

BarclaysManager wrote: »

My opinions are my own. I don't espouse them in the name of Barclays, nor do I "toe the line" - at no point have I tried to sell their products, etc. In fact, I've commented on internal policy and procedure that they'd rather I didn't.
.

You could have fooled me, you attempt to defend any justified critisism of your masters actions.

Being blunt, you appear to be just a mouthpiece for Barclays, despite your profile declaring otherwise.

Extant

savagej wrote: »

Yes, yes, anything you say BM, take a wee read of this and then come back with another answer as an apologist for what Barclays do and have done in Africa and then I can post another link, and so on and so forth:-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2848046.ece

So far, you've shown nothing about Barclays having racist policies now, or in the past. Doing business in Zimbabwe is not racist.

savagej wrote: »

Did you ever get to the end of your history lesson about Barclays Bank in Africa and state you were incorrect when you stated they were not racist etc.?

savagej

You can argue over semantics as much as you like BM, you can kid youself on as much as you need to to get by. In fact I would encourage you to do so because if you saw the facts for what they are you would not be doing exactly what inactive stated in the post above.

If I can be bothered I will cut and paste some comments from the article and see if you think it is acceptable behaviour by anyone whatsoever, not to mention in a country on which the UN has placed so many sanctions. Which they did for a reason.

You are clearly blinkered by and cannot see past Barclays, it is like romantic love on your part, in my opinion.

Extant

Inactive wrote: »

You could have fooled me, you attempt to defend any justified critisism of your masters actions.

Being blunt, you appear to be just a mouthpiece for Barclays, despite your profile declaring otherwise.

There's plenty of examples on this forum where I haven't defended our policies, and even referred people straight to our complaints team to resolve the issue.

Hell, I've even this morning advised someone to go in to their local branch and demand a refund from the manager due to a card fraud taking too long. I even offered to resolve it from head office if she didn't get what she wanted.

So I hardly defend everything.

Extant

savagej wrote: »

You can argue over semantics as much as you like BM, you can kid youself on as much as you need to to get by. In fact I would encourage you to do so because if you saw the facts for what they are you would not be doing exactly what inactive stated in the post above.

If I can be bothered I will cut and paste some comments from the article and see if you think it is acceptable behaviour by anyone whatsoever, not to mention in a country on which the UN has placed so many sanctions.

Zimbabwe is a separate and distinct issue; you are unable to prove your original assertion that Barclays operates, or has operated, racist policies. Yes or no?

Extant

savagej wrote: »

You are clearly blinkered by and cannot see past Barclays, it is like romantic love on your part, in my opinion.

As you've just added this part - I would expect this to be the opinion of the casual user on a forum such as this.

I've no interest in discussing my career in-depth, but it's hardly revolved around Barclays. I've also no interest in discussing my current role in depth, but I help to steer this ship, so some of the policies in place through UKRB have been, in part, crafted by myself. So of course I'm going to defend some of these things.

savagej

BarclaysManager wrote: »

Zimbabwe is a separate and distinct issue; you are unable to prove your original assertion that Barclays operates, or has operated, racist policies. Yes or no?

No it is not, being racist does not just mean giving preferential treatment to white people over black people, it goes the other way around as well and other ways around.

Barclays did not inhert the nickname "BoerclaysBank" in South Africa for no reason and I do not have to prove anything to you or give you a history lesson.

As I said just keep on beleiving what you do, because if you realised the truth your mind might not allow you to accept it anyway.

Extant

savagej wrote: »

No it is not, being racist does not just mean giving preferential treatment to white people over black people, it goes the other way around as well and other ways around.

Barclays did not inhert the nickname "BoerclaysBank" in South Africa for no reason and I do not have to prove anything to you or give you a history lesson.

As I said just keep on beleiving what you do, because if you realised the truth your mind might not allow you to accept it anyway.

So you're now slipping in to ad hominem. Unable to prove your point that Barclays operates racist policies - of any kind - you are trying to insult me instead, with some idea that I have mental issues. :rolleyes:

savagej

No I am not trying to insult you. The inability of one person to see exactly the facts as they are without being swayed by their own belief system is not a mental issue, it is one that is very difficult for any of us to do.

I cannot right now be bothered to go searching for the information that proves my point, but I promise I will come back to it.

Edit: out of interest do you see any problem in assisting Apartheid (is that tantamount to racism?) or a dictorship over which the UN has placed sanctions and a company choosing to ignore them for profit?