Guest Bilo Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 Take your foot out of your mouth, Bilo! Just making an observation. Whether I like or dislike Cameron is immaterial. The point I make is that the Tories old chestnut argument can now be countered by Labour. "deeper than I'm claiming"......that's a laugh. I was one of the first on here making the point that this wasn't just "evil kids". No, you've been claiming it's all down to the Tories. As you do on every political issue. Ever. I'm of the belief that it's stupid to blame Labour and Labour alone for fvcking up the economy during the credit crunch because it's abundantly clear that the blame for that lies at the fault of incompetent bankers gambling with our money, but I believe it's equally stupid to blame the Tories for this spate of rioting because of how deep the reasons behind it go. If you agree it's stupid to blame Labour for the banking crisis, then if you have any sense of balance at all you should agree the same here. The Tories are not wholly to blame for this, though they have their part to play as I've argued repeatedly throughout. The one thing this situation isn't is simple. If you look back on page 28 I've made quite a lengthy post that tries to steer clear of party politics and looks at our whole culture, from education to the dumbing down of popular media because I feel that taking that approach is far more productive than this childish tendency on both sides of the political landscape to place blame left or right. Party politics will solve nothing, pragmatism will.
l444ry Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 No, you've been claiming it's all down to the Tories. As you do on every political issue. Ever. I'm of the belief that it's stupid to blame Labour and Labour alone for fvcking up the economy during the credit crunch because it's abundantly clear that the blame for that lies at the fault of incompetent bankers gambling with our money, but I believe it's equally stupid to blame the Tories for this spate of rioting because of how deep the reasons behind it go. If you agree it's stupid to blame Labour for the banking crisis, then if you have any sense of balance at all you should agree the same here. The Tories are not wholly to blame for this, though they have their part to play as I've argued repeatedly throughout. The one thing this situation isn't is simple. If you look back on page 28 I've made quite a lengthy post that tries to steer clear of party politics and looks at our whole culture, from education to the dumbing down of popular media because I feel that taking that approach is far more productive than this childish tendency on both sides of the political landscape to place blame left or right. Party politics will solve nothing, pragmatism will. Isn't that, in a nutshell, exactly what I just said - but in reverse?
sphericalfox Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 are you going to be begging for my attention all night again, its looking like it I'm just pointing out your pseudo intellectual arguments are falling pretty much on their arse every time you post. Laughable really. But you need the attention so you keep coming back for more, as though you actually feel you are winning some FT argument league. I guess you need the virtual attention that your 600 friends can't give you.
Guest Bilo Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 Isn't that, in a nutshell, exactly what I just said - but in reverse? So you don't believe the Tories are wholly to blame then?
l444ry Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 DANGEROUS TIGER vs l444ry. This could be entertaining. No danger of that! He would be out of his depth in a puddle.
Guest lcfc80 Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 No, you've been claiming it's all down to the Tories. As you do on every political issue. Ever. I'm of the belief that it's stupid to blame Labour and Labour alone for fvcking up the economy during the credit crunch because it's abundantly clear that the blame for that lies at the fault of incompetent bankers gambling with our money, but I believe it's equally stupid to blame the Tories for this spate of rioting because of how deep the reasons behind it go. If you agree it's stupid to blame Labour for the banking crisis, then if you have any sense of balance at all you should agree the same here. The Tories are not wholly to blame for this, though they have their part to play as I've argued repeatedly throughout. The one thing this situation isn't is simple. If you look back on page 28 I've made quite a lengthy post that tries to steer clear of party politics and looks at our whole culture, from education to the dumbing down of popular media because I feel that taking that approach is far more productive than this childish tendency on both sides of the political landscape to place blame left or right. Party politics will solve nothing, pragmatism will. to be fair this issue shouldnt really be about party politics in the whole and most polititians have agreed apart from harman and livingstone who shown themselves up in my opinion and got shot down pretty quickly by millaband. There was a interesting article in todays daily mail about how the country has got to this
l444ry Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 So you don't believe the Tories are wholly to blame then? No. I pretty much agree with your stance.
21st Century Fox Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 love the dribble on here when people can't answer points with any substance or facts Woah there!!!! Have you ever written an essay or dissertation, fact and substance is usually backed up with credible evidence. Citing what your 300-500 friends say in a pub is generally frowned upon.
Guest lcfc80 Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 I'm just pointing out your pseudo intellectual arguments are falling pretty much on their arse every time you post. Laughable really. But you need the attention so you keep coming back for more, as though you actually feel you are winning some FT argument league. I guess you need the virtual attention that your 600 friends can't give you. ha ha, you or anybody that does out do me in an arguement then I'll hold my hands up but so far not even close. Oh and by the way you see that fella a few pages back saying they did it for the exact same reasons I said last night? i expect you to go into full melt down at him as well now
Guest lcfc80 Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 Woah there!!!! Have you ever written an essay or dissertation, fact and substance is usually backed up with credible evidence. Citing what your 300-500 friends say in a pub is generally frowned upon. if you were to do a study of a social group would you mix with that social group or read a book now back off before I remind you how you went full bore into saying if they had access to education they wouldnt of rioted till i pointed out the error of your statment with the student riots
Salieri Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 No danger of that! He would be out of his depth in a puddle. Yeah but he could bring you down with emoticons.... "Booooo you maggot, cretin etc : :thumbdown: etc.
21st Century Fox Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 if you were to do a study of a social group would you mix with that social group or read a book now back off before I remind you how you went full bore into saying if they had access to education they wouldnt of rioted till i pointed out the error of your statment with the student riots You certainly are the trailblazing sociologist, damn the books and science. And I shall again remind you of the difference of rioting for a perceived cause and using your own reason and logic to form a justifiable cause to do so and rioting because you can without just cause. However you do seem to be impervious to reason and logic, so I probably will use my evening constructively and read a book. While you are sitting smugly at your computer, do spare a thought as to why you are doing so, is it because you seemly enjoy the 'buzz' of an argument or is it because somewhere in your childhood you experienced something that made you feel the need to believe you're always right without a use for evidence, facts and reason. Maybe you were told to "shut up" alot as a child.
Guest lcfc80 Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 You certainly are the trailblazing sociologist, damn the books and science. And I shall again remind you of the difference of rioting for a perceived cause and using your own reason and logic to form a justifiable cause to do so and rioting because you can without just cause. However you do seem to be impervious to reason and logic, so I probably will use my evening constructively and read a book. While you are sitting smugly at your computer, do spare a thought as to why you are doing so, is it because you seemly enjoy the 'buzz' of an argument or is it because somewhere in your childhood you experienced something that made you feel the need to believe you're always right without a use for evidence, facts and reason. and after all these pages and repeated boring posts of yours (thats my opinion, not a cast iron fact) and you have actually brought no evidence, no researched debate, just your opinion, like I have yet you want to make out you opinion is more valued than mine. and still dont forget i tucked you right up with your access to education theory and i genuinely did enjoy the debate last night till i read yet another snidey comment after you knew I'd logged off edit - just wanted to point out i didnt mean that smug little 'giggle' smilie, thought it was another one
sphericalfox Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 ha ha, you or anybody that does out do me in an arguement then I'll hold my hands up but so far not even close. Oh and by the way you see that fella a few pages back saying they did it for the exact same reasons I said last night? i expect you to go into full melt down at him as well now It must be difficult being so insecure. Laughing at your own inane jokes too.
Guest lcfc80 Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 It must be difficult being so insecure. Laughing at your own inane jokes too. bring some debate to the table instead of wasting your time having little digs all the time then............
Salieri Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 I'll be glad when this thread dies a death. It's becoming a bit tiresome and repetitive.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 Take your foot out of your mouth, Bilo! Just making an observation. Whether I like or dislike Cameron is immaterial. The point I make is that the Tories old chestnut argument can now be countered by Labour. "deeper than I'm claiming"......that's a laugh. I was one of the first on here making the point that this wasn't just "evil kids". Labour should be careful with any political gain they try and make from this as I think most will view that in bad taste. This situation could also be the making of Cameron. If he takes a hard line stance I imagine that will be approved by the populist majority, regardless of whether that is the right or wrong approach. Add in the fact that Ed Millaband just doesn't seem electable as a PM, I'd be very suprised if Cameron doesn't get a second term, without the liberals this time!
MC Prussian Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 I'll be glad when this thread dies a death. It's becoming a bit tiresome and repetitive. Yeah, I miss that particular spark.
Guest lcfc80 Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 I'll be glad when this thread dies a death. It's becoming a bit tiresome and repetitive. my heart dropped a little bit when i saw the same people start jumping on my posts as well from yesterday. i was hoping it was going to take an interesting twist after l444ry's first post
davieG Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 This topic needs burning and looting either that or Sperical & 80 should put each other on ignore.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 nothing like stereotyping There's generally a reason for certain groups having stereotypes attached to them whether they are good or bad. I think most would agree that if given the scenarios of a group of nuns confronting the rioters and a group of football lads, two very different pictures would form in their heads as to what the outcome would be. But stereotyping aside, how many citizen arrests did the football lads make?
sphericalfox Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 bring some debate to the table instead of wasting your time having little digs all the time then............ Debate to the table? You've just said above that 21st Century has made opinions not based on fact, and that you yourself have done the same, and that his argument holds no more weight than yours. However, you seem intent on winning, and declaring yourself superior or the winner. You are an imbecile and I shall not be debating with you. You are same sort of twat I see down the pub who just spews recollected tidbits in an effort to seem intellectual. Nice to see you shoehorn that you read the Daily Mail in one of your posts. WELL DONE TO YOU!
Guest lcfc80 Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 Labour should be careful with any political gain they try and make from this as I think most will view that in bad taste. This situation could also be the making of Cameron. If he takes a hard line stance I imagine that will be approved by the populist majority, regardless of whether that is the right or wrong approach. Add in the fact that Ed Millaband just doesn't seem electable as a PM, I'd be very suprised if Cameron doesn't get a second term, without the liberals this time! now we get into the good post with out the dribble. you are spot on about the political gain bit as i posted earlier, harriet harrman and ken livingstone both try and had a little pop about cuts and ed millaband was smart enough to see that was a bad move and laid out the party line. As much as I'd like the tories to be in total control unless they make massive inroads into Scotland they are going to get an outright majority (imo) your Millaband comment does look true though as I watch every PMQ's and he struggles almost every week. if they have the live leader debates during the next election like the last one clegg and cameron will rip him apart
tewkesbury-fox Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 bring some debate to the table instead of wasting your time having little digs all the time then............ Your viewpoint is flawed....little one i think could i refer you to some literature and some papers that you might find of some use i did when i did my PHD in criminal psychology and environmental psychology.
Guest lcfc80 Posted 11 August 2011 Posted 11 August 2011 Debate to the table? You've just said above that 21st Century has made opinions not based on fact, and that you yourself have done the same, and that his argument holds no more weight than yours. However, you seem intent on winning, and declaring yourself superior or the winner. You are an imbecile and I shall not be debating with you. You are same sort of twat I see down the pub who just spews recollected tidbits in an effort to seem intellectual. Nice to see you shoehorn that you read the Daily Mail in one of your posts. WELL DONE TO YOU! very defensive post there, dont converse with me if you cant hack it because you seem to be struggling badly now, after all, every debate really does come down to personal opinion, just about everything in this world could be concieved diffently in other peoples eyes. I actually made a few concessions last night but still got shot down so it goes both ways eh and the daily mail was on the canteen table at work so what do i do on my break, read the paper or read ingrediants to my tin of tuna?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.