Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

@Benguin

I can't believe I'm agreeing with owen Jones Awareness of who the guy is, surprise he's making an apparently fair point.

 

but anybody who's been paying attention to US politics should be more than aware of the far right's use of a black flag with one of the lines replaced with a blue one. To directly copy that design using a Union flag is eyebrow raising at the least.  Explanation for why the Union Flag image raised red flags given the striking similarities to a contemporarily popular emblem of far-right, bad faith discourse.

 

I notice a lot are of the opinion that since you can pretty easily make case-specific justifications for each element of the design that there's nothing to it, that's usually the whole point of these far right memes: Make them mostly innocuous so you can deny, deflect and obfuscate.  Hopefully no confusion here:  Pepe, Kekistan, Clownface, that kind of thing.

 

I'm not saying it's definitely the case here but it plays into those hands and it can't have been hard to make a more unique design.  Distinct emphasis on not condemning the image but pondering why nobody involved saw and sidestepped the obvious resemblance, later information proved it perfectly benign, good thing I kept an open mind or I might look stupid here.

 

 

I have no problem with anything I said there, I think it holds up well and fairly explains the situation in the context where the tweeted picture was understood to be a recent design.  Hit me up if you have any further queries.

My original reply presupposed that you, like Owen Jones and all the other “let’s get offended” brigade, had been ignorant of the fact that the emblem predates any right wing use and I think I was right.

 

Should Muslims stop saying allahu Akbar because terrorists use it? 
 

it is so frustrating that there is an army of people rising up who disregard facts, purpose and context solely to be in a state of outrage. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Benguin said:

My original reply presupposed that you, like Owen Jones and all the other “let’s get offended” brigade, had been ignorant of the fact that the emblem predates any right wing use and I think I was right.

 

Should Muslims stop saying allahu Akbar because terrorists use it? 
 

it is so frustrating that there is an army of people rising up who disregard facts, purpose and context solely to be in a state of outrage. 

This is your problem right here.  There was no disregarding of facts, just valid questions based on information known at the time which were answered by the relevant facts at which point opinion was changed (I mean, I know mine was and after a brief dive into Owen Jones' twitter I can see the offending tweet has been deleted and replaced with an apology, was there anybody else questioning it?), so literally the opposite of what you're suggesting.  One might even say you're disregarding the facts, purpose and context here solely to be in a state of outrage.

 

And your original comment was "I know I’m a bit more conservative than the average folk on here but I just can’t even fathom how one can think so blindly and stupidly".  That's a bit more than presuming ignorance which isn't inherently bad and shouldn't be seen as such, it's suggesting deliberate distortion.

 

For a misunderstanding that was so easily and amicably resolved there was no need to drag an argument out, least of all into a redundant terrorism analogy, redundant because the logic you're suggesting the rabid mobs should adhere to (the idea that original usage trump later developments) is the same logic that had already been applied while you continued to be in your state of outrage.

 

So unless you can present some evidence of this "let's get offended" brigade I suggest you let this one drop and maybe have a think about how other people's political alignment seems to cloud your interpretation of their words and actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knew?

 

The rolls used in Subway's hot sandwiches contain too much sugar to be considered bread, according to Ireland's Supreme Court.

Ireland's highest court made the ruling in a case about how the bread is taxed.

An Irish franchisee of the US company had claimed it should not pay VAT on the rolls it uses in heated sandwiches.

However, the court ruled that because of the amount of sugar they contain, they cannot be taxed as a "staple product" at a zero rate of VAT.

Under Ireland's VAT Act of 1972, ingredients in bread such as sugar and fat should not exceed 2% of the weight of flour in the dough.

Are there good and bad sugars?

The five judges, who were considering an appeal by Bookfinders Ltd, a Subway franchisee based near Galway, concluded that in Subway sandwiches the sugar content is around 10% of the flour in the dough for both white and wholegrain rolls.

In Irish law, bread is considered a staple food and has a zero rate of VAT. Following the ruling, the rolls are subject to tax at 13.5%.

The case stems from a decision by Ireland's tax authority in 2006 to refuse Bookfinders' request for a refund on VAT payments made between 2004 and 2005.

After an appeal commissioner upheld the tax authority's refusal of a refund, Bookfinders took its case to the High Court which it lost before going to the Court of Appeal, where it was also unsuccessful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, twoleftfeet said:

Its interesting in terms of a (miss)labelling technicallity sausages most contain 42% pork to be a pirk sausage but a vegan poo log doesnt have to contain any vegans. 

fixed it.

 

I concur though.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW!

 

HTF!

 

A driver suffered only minor injuries despite his van being crushed between two lorries in a crash on the M1 today.

Leicestershire Police have published this amazing picture showing the scene of the crash on the northbound motorway in the county this morning.

The van was all but flattened between the front of one heavy goods vehicle and the trailer of another

 

2_M1lorries.jpg

 

2_M1lorries.jpg

 

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/driver-escapes-only-slight-injuries-4571568

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/10/2020 at 09:33, davieG said:

WOW!

 

HTF!

 

A driver suffered only minor injuries despite his van being crushed between two lorries in a crash on the M1 today.

Leicestershire Police have published this amazing picture showing the scene of the crash on the northbound motorway in the county this morning.

The van was all but flattened between the front of one heavy goods vehicle and the trailer of another

 

2_M1lorries.jpg

 

2_M1lorries.jpg

 

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/driver-escapes-only-slight-injuries-4571568

Mindboggling

Link to post
Share on other sites

Macron and the French government working hard for so long, spending millions to free a French-born hostage from Mali just to find out that the hostage converted to Islam lol 

 

 

Edited by the fox
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, the fox said:

Macron and the French government working hard for so long, spending millions to free a French-born hostage from Mali just to find out that the hostage converted to Islam lol 

 

 

And that’s funny how?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Columbus Day over the pond soon, and of course the WH has their viewpoint:

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-columbus-day-2020

 

“Sadly, in recent years, radical activists have sought to undermine Christopher Columbus’s legacy. These extremists seek to replace discussion of his vast contributions with talk of failings, his discoveries with atrocities, and his achievements with transgressions. Rather than learn from our history, this radical ideology and its adherents seek to revise it, deprive it of any splendor, and mark it as inherently sinister. They seek to squash any dissent from their orthodoxy. We must not give in to these tactics or consent to such a bleak view of our history. We must teach future generations about our storied heritage, starting with the protection of monuments to our intrepid heroes like Columbus.”

 

...is it really "revisionist" to say that the original colonists and those that followed treated the indigenous Native Americans with patronising condescension at best and wholesale slaughter and cultural erasure at worst? Because that is what really happened.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Columbus Day over the pond soon, and of course the WH has their viewpoint:

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-columbus-day-2020

 

“Sadly, in recent years, radical activists have sought to undermine Christopher Columbus’s legacy. These extremists seek to replace discussion of his vast contributions with talk of failings, his discoveries with atrocities, and his achievements with transgressions. Rather than learn from our history, this radical ideology and its adherents seek to revise it, deprive it of any splendor, and mark it as inherently sinister. They seek to squash any dissent from their orthodoxy. We must not give in to these tactics or consent to such a bleak view of our history. We must teach future generations about our storied heritage, starting with the protection of monuments to our intrepid heroes like Columbus.”

 

...is it really "revisionist" to say that the original colonists and those that followed treated the indigenous Native Americans with patronising condescension at best and wholesale slaughter and cultural erasure at worst? Because that is what really happened.

....Its not convenient to talk about the natives, move along nothing to see here...

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, twoleftfeet said:

Dont see many natives trying to topple the statues. 

I'm curious to know what this has to do with the White House issuing a press release regarding Columbus Day that not only mentions nothing about the way indigenous Americans were treated in the aftermath of his visit, but flat-out implies that everyone else should say nothing about it either?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...