Jump to content

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

But it's one of them, Rachel Riley gets away with spouting shit and bullying children but because she's on the right side of the argument she doesn't get banned or anything. Wiley is clearly uneducated on the matter.

When you say on the right side of the matter, do you mean not racist, and actively calling out racists?  To be honest I don't see any good reason why Twitter would ban anyone for that?  How is this anything like Wiley going full on racist rant for a whole day?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

When you say on the right side of the matter, do you mean not racist, and actively calling out racists?  To be honest I don't see any good reason why Twitter would ban anyone for that?  How is this anything like Wiley going full on racist rant for a whole day?

So you're fine with her going round bullying children and spouting the shite she does just because you agree with her basically. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, iniesta said:

Hear this often.. Women and gays now being thrown off buildings with big bad Don in charge? 

This has cropped up here before, as it happens, and the answer is the same as it was before.

 

Why go for the obvious ISIS-style approach like that when you can just attain a position of power and ensure legislation is passed in employment, healthcare and various other areas that makes their lives a misery/difficult in a variety of different ways? It's not as spectacular and probably doesn't result in as many bodies on the floor, but if your aim is to inflict suffering on those folks simply because of who they are, then it gets the job done.

 

And the best thing about it? It's indirect and therefore deniable, which means one can turn around and say "but hey, I'm not responsible for their terrible lives!" and one can also get people (like, with respect, yourself) saying that things are actually OK and there's not a lot wrong simply because there's not much visible blood being spilled. And so with a nice bit of PR, it can be done for as long as one likes without being too worried about consequences. Smart, huh?

Edited by leicsmac
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/07/2020 at 00:11, The Horse's Mouth said:

But it's one of them, Rachel Riley gets away with spouting shit and bullying children but because she's on the right side of the argument she doesn't get banned or anything. Wiley is clearly uneducated on the matter.

 

‘The right side of the argument’ Oh my god!

It’s not up for debate whether it’s ok to incite hatred and violence to a whole religion.

I suppose it’s only the Jews though eh?

 

What the **** is wrong with you.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53603501

 

Obviously I like what Barack is saying here, but I do wish he'd done more to address the weakness of the system against voter suppression when he had the power to do so.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53599363

 

Pretty sure that Trump,along with everyone and their mother, knows that the election can't be moved or delayed, not really, anyway. This ain't about that - it's about establishing a platform to challenge the results in the courts by saying they're not legit if and when Trump loses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Nuneatonfox in Manchester said:

 

‘The right side of the argument’ Oh my god!

It’s not up for debate whether it’s ok to incite hatred and violence to a whole religion.

I suppose it’s only the Jews though eh?

 

What the **** is wrong with you.

 

Are you thick, where did I say that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, The Horse's Mouth said:

Are you thick, where did I say that?

No I’m pretty sharp as it goes.


From your post it seems that you find Riley’s condemnation of anti-semitism more offensive than Wiley’s disgusting rant.

 

He needs educating... hahahaha he’s 41, not some kid. I suspect that if the writer was Tommy Robinson and the subject was Literally ALL Muslims, you would be calling for a lot more than a bit of education.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Nuneatonfox in Manchester said:

No I’m pretty sharp as it goes.


From your post it seems that you find Riley’s condemnation of anti-semitism more offensive than Wiley’s disgusting rant.

 

He needs educating... hahahaha he’s 41, not some kid. I suspect that if the writer was Tommy Robinson and the subject was Literally ALL Muslims, you would be calling for a lot more than a bit of education.

Well you're not because you've completely missed the point, what Wiley said is apart of his religion at the end of the day, people love to defend islam but they have similar views regarding the jewish people. Not that i agree with his statements either.I'm talking about Riley's actions on a whole, she goes around bullying children and lying most of the time, but because her image is that shes standing up to anti semitism it's completely ignored and approved. You either cancel them both or let them both carry on imo

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

From midnight tonight, most over-75s will probably be breaking the law! Why, because they don't (yet) have a tv licence. Personally, I think it's wrong we should be forced to pay for a service that we don't necessarily use at all. If none of my computer equipment is set up to view BBC programming, my tv aerial is removed and my satellite dish points at a satellite other than Astra 28E, how can such a charge of nearly £160 p/a be justified? Maybe the BBC should consider slashing the ludicrous salaries handed out to some of their presenters, including Gary Lineker, so that hard-up pensioners don't end up paying for their luxury lifestyles.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, String fellow said:

From midnight tonight, most over-75s will probably be breaking the law! Why, because they don't (yet) have a tv licence. Personally, I think it's wrong we should be forced to pay for a service that we don't necessarily use at all. If none of my computer equipment is set up to view BBC programming, my tv aerial is removed and my satellite dish points at a satellite other than Astra 28E, how can such a charge of nearly £160 p/a be justified? Maybe the BBC should consider slashing the ludicrous salaries handed out to some of their presenters, including Gary Lineker, so that hard-up pensioners don't end up paying for their luxury lifestyles.

The BBC ought to be stripped down and funded by the taxpayer. I think there's merit in providing a news service independent of the government and private interests.

 

By all means have a privately funded wing offering the entertainment services.

Edited by LiberalFox
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/07/2020 at 19:20, Nuneatonfox in Manchester said:

No I’m pretty sharp as it goes.


From your post it seems that you find Riley’s condemnation of anti-semitism more offensive than Wiley’s disgusting rant.

 

He needs educating... hahahaha he’s 41, not some kid. I suspect that if the writer was Tommy Robinson and the subject was Literally ALL Muslims, you would be calling for a lot more than a bit of education.

Surely the answer to all hatred be is racism, homophobia, sexism or anything else is education?

No matter what someone’s age is, we should always be looking to educate?

I don’t care if it’s Tommy Robinson or the 12 year old kid who abused Zaha on Twitter, the answer is always education.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Aus Fox said:

Surely the answer to all hatred be is racism, homophobia, sexism or anything else is education?

No matter what someone’s age is, we should always be looking to educate?

I don’t care if it’s Tommy Robinson or the 12 year old kid who abused Zaha on Twitter, the answer is always education.

How do you educate someone against their beliefs?   very difficult to turn around decades of indoctrination in some people .........  statistically there will always be arseholes ...... if there weren’t then how would we know that we aren’t arseholes ! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53597137

 

A darkly interesting read.

 

I think it goes without saying that special forces aren't going to be squeaky clean, and when things go sideways as they seemingly have here the establishment is going to parrot the line of "national security" and go with a cover-up. The UK is not an exception to the rule there, nor should it pretend to be,

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53597137

 

A darkly interesting read.

 

I think it goes without saying that special forces aren't going to be squeaky clean, and when things go sideways as they seemingly have here the establishment is going to parrot the line of "national security" and go with a cover-up. The UK is not an exception to the rule there, nor should it pretend to be,

Par for the course...

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-15/sas-soldiers-allegedly-plant-gun-on-dead-bodies-in-afghanistan/12452964

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-21/australian-sas-soldiers-killed-the-wrong-afghan-man/12472478

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/07/2020 at 00:11, The Horse's Mouth said:

But it's one of them, Rachel Riley gets away with spouting shit and bullying children but because she's on the right side of the argument she doesn't get banned or anything. Wiley is clearly uneducated on the matter.

 

On 30/07/2020 at 17:50, Jon the Hat said:

When you say on the right side of the matter, do you mean not racist, and actively calling out racists?  To be honest I don't see any good reason why Twitter would ban anyone for that?  How is this anything like Wiley going full on racist rant for a whole day?

Rachel Riley is annoying. Thankfully I don't see any of her stuff anymore. As soon as someone goes back at her she cries off. 

 

She uploaded a photo of herself in a shirt saying "Jeremy Corbyn is a racist" and the photo had been edited from when Corbyn was demonstrating against Apartheid. That was never right.

Edited by Fox92
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, m4DD0gg said:

Wave good bye to what building standards are left, the rise of cowboy 'speculative' builders and the destruction of the english countryside.

 

Astonishing to be honest, but hey when people are looking the other way........

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53625960

Something had to be done. The planners at a nearby hospital wanted 13 weeks to approve a new oxygen tank to be installed as part of the Covid preparations.

 

As long as the government are unable to do what they say because the civil servants are being difficult, we will see more and more power being transferred to Westminster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

 

Rachel Riley is annoying. Thankfully I don't see any of her stuff anymore. As soon as someone goes back at her she cries off. 

 

She uploaded a photo of herself in a shirt saying "Jeremy Corbyn is a racist" and the photo had been edited from when Corbyn was demonstrating against Apartheid. That was never right.

Just out of interest do you have any edited pics of her without the shirt ? 🙂

Edited by Mike Oxlong
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, String fellow said:

Does anyone have a list of current heterosexual Conservative male MPs, who are ex-ministers in their 50s? There can't be that many.

There's 8 or 9 I think. I won't list their names.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, String fellow said:

Does anyone have a list of current heterosexual Conservative male MPs, who are ex-ministers in their 50s? There can't be that many.

Look hard enough online and you'll find the list. That being said it's best to avoid speculation on names as only 1 in about 9 or 10 of those names has been accused of something when the others are wrongly having their names dragged through the mud all over the internet. Also the name has been withheld to protect the victims identity. My point is if you dig you'll find answers. Should you dig? No. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, m4DD0gg said:

Wave good bye to what building standards are left, the rise of cowboy 'speculative' builders and the destruction of the english countryside.

 

Astonishing to be honest, but hey when people are looking the other way........

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53625960

I fvcking despair.

 

On top of the authorisation of increased permitted development rights, this. 

 

I don't know much of Jenrick but it is clear as day the bloke does not know how this stuff works and he is just wanting to line the pockets of his pals. This is bad bad news long term.

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   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...