Also In The News

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

Wow full-scale Machiavelli

Sorry, Kopf, but I'm not going to apologise for that take (hur hur hur).

 

The logic of necessity is reasonably simple when you look at as many of the possible scenarios as you can and view them against each other in terms of what they will cost in lives and societal structure, especially when you consider you're not actually dealing with an entity that applies morality in any way at all (even if a lot of the problems are exacerbated by human activity) and so will apply consequences in an random or wholesale fashion, or both. If there is an existing threat that cannot be negotiated with or otherwise appealed to morally (so unlike the vast majority of threats that exist human-to-human), then it simply stands to reason to deal with that threat however possible as quickly as possible, and then actually work on making the world afterwards a more pleasant one to live in. The imminent meteor strike is a good parallel to use.

 

If you believe that how the human race continues is more important than the fact it does continue (short of, as I said above, an Orwellian nightmare in which everyone might as well be dead) then fair enough - it's safe to say that we disagree.

 

 

[Wortho]

I expect Trudeau would get on well Prince Harry. They could talk about climate change, nazi uniforms and blacking up and being Liberal.

[leicsmac]

Mind you, seeing as Trudeau is having his skeletons in the closet thoroughly rattled, let's have a look at his key opponent:

 

https://www.facebook.com/ellen.bond.90/videos/1374636279370882/

[Facecloth]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

So basically then if you spout left wing views it doesn't matter what you do or how you behave, first on climate change and now even when it comes to racism - how long before we are defending wife beaters providing they drop 20p in the refuge box a few weeks later and announce it on Twitter?

 

Even if what you are saying is true, a little bit of self-awareness would have been nice from him. He maybe should have told us himself and apologised rather than hope to keep it hidden from public view? 

 

Instead he's spent the last few years being the messiah of wokeness, pontificating on everything from sexism, to racism all whilst he spent his early years constantly doing blackface. Hypocrite of the highest order, now defended by the hypocrites of the highest order. 

 

Hopefully the voters of Canada will send the Castro loving dissembler back to the hole he crawled out of.

Woah woah woah where did I say any of that. And the 20p thing, talk about hyberbole. 

 

What I'm saying is that if after a period of time you have shown values that are no longer prejudice to race, sex, sexuality etc that mistakes in the past can be forgiven. Your point about the wife beater, if after a few years he realises the errors of his ways and decides to help a refuge, he shouldn't be discouraged. This is someone doing something 20 years ago and you're comparing it to a week. By your logic, no criminal could ever be rehabilitaed and that everything everyone has done in the past should affect their future. I understand our actions have consequences, but if we've shown we've moved on from our mistakes, they shouldn't be used as a stick to beat us with. A prime example being Kevin Hart. Made some stupid comments in the past, owned up, apologised and made it clear that he no longer thought that way, only for a couple of years later the same comments get brought up and despite repeating his apology and insisting again that he had changed, he lost his gig as the Oscars presenter. Is this what we want to be doing? Judging people today on their views of a decade or more ago?

 

I did make the comment myself about a him having some self-awareness and apologising, but you seem to have left that off the quote of my post. I made that point because as you say in yours it's hypocritical of him to try and be a spokesperson for equality whilst knowingly hiding this dark secret, and that's where he's made the mistake. Your original post seem to criticise him for now holding values not aligned with the ones he held 20 years ago, and that's not fair. He's allowed to grow and change as a person. His views can change over time, all of ours can. So I don't think we should criticise him for speaking out against inequality just because he once had different outlook, but we certainly should be criticising for doing so whilst hiding that past.

Edited 20 September 2019 by Facecloth

[leicsmac]

18 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Woah woah woah where did I say any of that. And the 20p thing, talk about hyberbole. 

 

What I'm saying is that if after a period of time you have shown values that are no longer prejudice to race, sex, sexuality etc that mistakes in the past can be forgiven. Your point about the wife beater, if after a few years he realises the errors of his ways and decides to help a refuge, he shouldn't be discouraged. This is someone doing something 20 years ago and you're comparing it to a week. By your logic, no criminal could ever be rehabilitaed and that everything everyone has done in the past should affect their future. I understand our actions have consequences, but if we've shown we've moved on from our mistakes, they shouldn't be used as a stick to beat us with. A prime example being Kevin Hart. Made some stupid comments in the past, owned up, apologised and made it clear that he no longer thought that way, only for a couple of years later the same comments get brought up and despite repeating his apology and insisting again that he had changed, he lost his gig as the Oscars presenter. Is this what we want to be doing? Judging people today on their views of a decade or more ago?

 

I did make the comment myself about a him having some self-awareness and apologising, but you seem to have left that off the quote of my post. I made that point because as you say in yours it's hypocritical of him to try and be a spokesperson for equality whilst knowingly hiding this dark secret, and that's where he's made the mistake. Your original post seem to criticise him for now holding values not aligned with the ones he held 20 years ago, and that's not fair. He's allowed to grow and change as a person. His views can change over time, all of ours can. So I don't think we should criticise him for speaking out against inequality just because he once had different outlook, but we certainly should be criticising for doing so whilst hiding that past.

Thing is though, there are a lot of people - usually the ones who believe personal responsibility to be an absolute and certain traits are inherent rather than learned - who do actually believe this.

[MC Prussian]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Mind you, seeing as Trudeau is having his skeletons in the closet thoroughly rattled, let's have a look at his key opponent:

 

https://www.facebook.com/ellen.bond.90/videos/1374636279370882/

Andrew Scheer is bereft of any charisma and a bit too young to be PM, that's my opinion.

Shame him and other candidates are so weak or simply overlooked. I can't see what it'd take for Trudeau getting ousted from office as PM.

 

I quite like what Maxime Bernier is standing for - for most part. Elizabeth May comes across as reasonable, too.

But most voters won't sway from their usual suspects and I assume Trudeau will be re-elected, sadly.

[Trav Le Bleu]

In other racism news...

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49760230

 

Quote

Former Newcastle United forward Peter Beardsley has been suspended from all football-related activity for 32 weeks for making racist comments to players.

Ex-England man Beardsley called one black player "a monkey" while Newcastle's Under-23s coach and joked about climbing trees, an independent Football Association panel said.

It added his remarks "were obviously racist and wholly unacceptable".

Beardsley said he was "surprised and disappointed" by the panel's findings.

He was charged by the Football Association with three counts of using racist language to players in March and had "categorically denied" the claims.

He left Newcastle after a 14-month club investigation earlier this year.

The FA panel said in its written reasons: "Even if he did not intend to do so, he plainly did cause offence."

Beardsley, who was capped 59 times by England, has been ordered to complete a face-to-face education course.

However, the panel said it did not believe Beardsley was racist. "We are satisfied that Mr Beardsley is not a racist in the sense of being ill-disposed to persons on grounds of their race or ethnicity," it said.

"He is now 58 years of age. It is also relevant that he has not had the benefit of training and education about offensive racist remarks and the importance of not making them."

One of the witnesses to the "monkey" comment" said: "I don't think Peter meant it as racist, but it came out looking bad as he is a black player."

The panel did, though, say it had "serious reservations about Mr Beardsley's credibility".

One of the aggravating factors in deciding its punishment was that Beardsley had contended that "three of the black players had made up the allegations motivated by financial greed, for which he did not have a shred of evidence".

As a player, Newcastle-born Beardsley enjoyed two spells at his hometown club, making more than 300 appearances, and also played for Liverpool, Everton, Manchester City, Fulham, Bolton, Hartlepool, Doncaster, Carlisle and Vancouver Whitecaps.

What were the charges against Beardsley?

All three charges were proven by the panel, which found:

• Beardsley said: "You should be used to that" to one or more black players of African origin at a team-building event at Go Ape
• He questioned the legitimacy of the age of black players - "a negative stereotype that players of black African origin commit fraud as to their true age", the FA panel said, and
• He called a player of black African origin a monkey during a game of head tennis.

Football's anti-discrimination group Kick It Out called on Newcastle to publish its own findings from its internal investigation in the wake of the FA panel's punishment, "and clarify whether he was sacked for racist abuse".

It added: "Beardsley's career in football has no relevance to this case - calling black players monkeys, comparing black players to apes and questioning their true age are all horrific racial stereotypes. Punishment and education is the only way to deal with these matters."

Beardsley questions findings and vows to return

A statement from Beardsley's solicitors released shortly after the verdict was made public said: "Peter Beardsley is very surprised and disappointed by the decision of the Regulatory Commission.

"It was almost impossible for Peter to clear his name because of the serious flaws and contamination of evidence that occurred in the disciplinary process before Newcastle United and by the unusual fact that the FA Rules put the burden of proof on him to prove his innocence in the proceedings.

"After a long process which has been unnecessarily protracted, Peter feels vindicated that the Commission has expressly found that he is not a racist."

It added he had been "inundated with support" from "fellow professionals of the highest repute including John Barnes, Kevin Keegan, Les Ferdinand and Andrew Cole, as well as other football professionals including managers, coaches, players, and football fans, all of which provided unchallenged evidence to the Commission as to Peter's good character, the fact that he is not a racist and whatever was said, there was no intent to cause offence".

Bet that's really put his nose out of joint.

[leicsmac]

9 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Andrew Scheer is bereft of any charisma and a bit too young to be PM, that's my opinion.

Shame him and other candidates are so weak or simply overlooked. I can't see what it'd take for Trudeau getting ousted from office as PM.

 

I quite like what Maxime Bernier is standing for - for most part. Elizabeth May comes across as reasonable, too.

But most voters won't sway from their usual suspects and I assume Trudeau will be re-elected, sadly.

I'm thinking May has some good ideas too, Bernier sadly is totally lacking in understanding of the environmental department like most other centre-right libertarians.

 

I'm with you on the overall analysis, though.

[Jattdogg]

4 hours ago, MattP said:

So basically then if you spout left wing views it doesn't matter what you do or how you behave, first on climate change and now even when it comes to racism - how long before we are defending wife beaters providing they drop 20p in the refuge box a few weeks later and announce it on Twitter?

 

Even if what you are saying is true, a little bit of self-awareness would have been nice from him. He maybe should have told us himself and apologised rather than hope to keep it hidden from public view? 

 

Instead he's spent the last few years being the messiah of wokeness, pontificating on everything from sexism, to racism all whilst he spent his early years constantly doing blackface. Hypocrite of the highest order, now defended by the hypocrites of the highest order. 

 

Hopefully the voters of Canada will send the Castro loving dissembler back to the hole he crawled out of.

He isnt getting my vote thats for sure.

 

[The Fox Covert]

On 19/09/2019 at 21:10, Dr The Singh said:

I'm struggling with why dressing up as a brown or black person is racist.

 

If that's the case the most racist thing in the world is majority of the world having a white Jesus, FFS that man was brown.....nobody talks about that do they.

All the focus is on the blacking up and costumes. With all the reporting in the last few days I haven't seen anything about actual racist behaviour by Trudeau. 

I would be the first to condemn if he had called a black person a w** or someone of Indian origin a Paki, or he had supported discriminatory policies but he doesn't seem to have done any of that.

I used to have an MP who, when Parliament re-convened after the 2006 election showed his true colours to one of the new Labour intake, a black and fairly young woman, in one of the committee rooms at the House of Commons. Assuming that she was the cleaner, he pointed to the corner of the room and said dismissively that the bin was over there. When she diplomatically replied that she was a new member of the committee, he replied in the plummy tones of generations of inherited privilege 'they let anyone in this House these days'.

I love the comment about Jesus, who would definitely have had a Middle Eastern complexion, along with virtually everyone else in the Bible!

[String fellow]

We seem to be in an era when new words keeping appearing. A while ago, John Cleese said he was a 'culturalist', not a racist. Now we have Mark Ronson declaring that he's 'sapiosexual'. In other words, he's attracted by brains, not gender. You might think that a 'financiosexual' is someone who's attracted to rich people. Not the case! It means someone who has sex with piles of money. The mind boggles!

[leicsmac]

28 minutes ago, String fellow said:

We seem to be in an era when new words keeping appearing. A while ago, John Cleese said he was a 'culturalist', not a racist. Now we have Mark Ronson declaring that he's 'sapiosexual'. In other words, he's attracted by brains, not gender. You might think that a 'financiosexual' is someone who's attracted to rich people. Not the case! It means someone who has sex with piles of money. The mind boggles!

Language has always evolved.

 

And people are often afraid of change.

[Alf Bentley]

4 hours ago, String fellow said:

We seem to be in an era when new words keeping appearing. A while ago, John Cleese said he was a 'culturalist', not a racist. Now we have Mark Ronson declaring that he's 'sapiosexual'. In other words, he's attracted by brains, not gender. You might think that a 'financiosexual' is someone who's attracted to rich people. Not the case! It means someone who has sex with piles of money. The mind boggles!

 

I'm a non-culturalist slapiosexual. I'm attracted to uncultured old slappers.

 

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Language has always evolved.

 

And people are often afraid of change.

 

Linguaevoluphobic tossers!

 

Sorry, lads, a bit giddy after the win. 

[WigstonWanderer]

4 hours ago, String fellow said:

We seem to be in an era when new words keeping appearing. A while ago, John Cleese said he was a 'culturalist', not a racist. Now we have Mark Ronson declaring that he's 'sapiosexual'. In other words, he's attracted by brains, not gender. You might think that a 'financiosexual' is someone who's attracted to rich people. Not the case! It means someone who has sex with piles of money. The mind boggles!

Yeah, I could go for that. 

[MC Prussian]

Thomas Cook faces bankruptcy, their tourists held back in Tunisia over fear of unpaid bills - unless the tourists pay again out of their own pocket:

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/thomas-cook-latest-news-update-collapse-tunisia-hammamet-pay-again-a9115081.html

[Trav Le Bleu]

On 21/09/2019 at 12:14, leicsmac said:

Language has always evolved.

 

And people are often afraid of change.

It only changes if people don't think, "what a knobhead, what the hell is he on about!".

Edited 22 September 2019 by Trav Le Bleu

[Trav Le Bleu]

On 21/09/2019 at 16:08, Alf Bentley said:

 

I'm a non-culturalist slapiosexual. I'm attracted to uncultured old slappers.

 

 

Linguaevoluphobic tossers!

 

Sorry, lads, a bit giddy after the win. 

Not only are you being magniloquent, you're also verisimilitude.

Edited 22 September 2019 by Trav Le Bleu

[Mike Oxlong]

Turned on the breakfast news this morning to think I’d tuned in to an item about a scruffy scarecrow convention. Turns out it was actually the Labour Party Conference.

[WigstonWanderer]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/23/johnson-under-pressure-over-friend-receiving-public-funds

 

What a slimy toad you’ve got as a Prime Minister.  Can’t understand why you elected him 

[ozleicester]

Demorats in the US to institute "Impeachment Proceedings" against Trump.

 

Criminals in power in the USA and UK

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49814927

 

Now it gets interesting.

[leicsmac]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-religious-ethnic-minorities-uighur-muslim-harvest-organs-un-human-rights-a9117911.html

 

Old news, but still pretty horrifying - when the only religion allowed is the one of the Party.

[Finnegan]

"I've been disgraced," Veyrat said, adding that the announcement had left his staff "in tears".

He earlier said food inspectors "dared to say we put cheddar in our soufflé".

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49810489

 

 

The single most French thing I've ever read

[MC Prussian]

8 hours ago, ozleicester said:

Demorats in the US to institute "Impeachment Proceedings" against Trump.

 

Criminals in power in the USA and UK

 

7 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49814927

 

Now it gets interesting.

 

Well, yeah. That applies to both sides of the aisle.

In an ideal world, we'd need a new breed of politicians. Independent, not corrupted by lobbyists, young(er), competent and idealistic, yet still close to the voting population.

The closest thing you could do is vote for these people. But from previous experience in European elections, voters tend to have this lemming mentality, blindly following the same old, same old. For various reasons.

 

As for the US, an impeachment is the only remaining weapon the Democrats have against Trump - their last resort, seeing how weak and uncharismatic their presidential candidates are.

They'd all be brushed aside by Trump in a debate and they know it. Hence every attempt at getting him impeached.

Edited 25 September 2019 by MC Prussian

[Carl the Llama]

9 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Well, yeah. That applies to both sides of the aisle.

In an ideal world, we'd need a new breed of politicians. Independent, not corrupted by lobbyists, young(er), competent and idealistic, yet still close to the voting population.

The closest thing you could do is vote for these people. But from previous experience in European elections, voters tend to have this lemming mentality, blindly following the same old, same old. For various reasons.

 

As for the US, an impeachment is the only remaining weapon the Democrats have against Trump - their last resort, seeing how weak and uncharismatic their presidential candidates are.

They'd all be brushed aside by Trump in a debate and they know it. Hence every attempt at getting him impeached.

 

6 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

 

 

Well, yeah. That applies to both sides of the aisle.

In an ideal world, we'd need a new breed of politicians. Independent, not corrupted by lobbyists, young(er), competent and idealistic, yet still close to the voting population.

The closest thing you could do is vote for these people. But from previous experience in European elections, voters tend to have this lemming mentality, blindly following the same old, same old. For various reasons.

 

As for the US, an impeachment is the only remaining weapon the Democrats have against Trump - their last resort, seeing how weak and uncharismatic their presidential candidates are.

They'd all be brushed aside by Trump in a debate and they know it. Hence every attempt at getting him impeached.