|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Feb 28, 2019 18:20:44 GMT
In order to appease 'minorities' the majority are discriminated against. Tail wags dog. It's been happening with that Scotty Dog north of the border for decades. It would be nice to have some English politics They enjoy barking up the wrong tree.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Feb 28, 2019 18:22:25 GMT
It's been happening with that Scotty Dog north of the border for decades. It would be nice to have some English politics They enjoy barking up the wrong tree. I think we'll just leave it at barking apart from Partick of course
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Feb 28, 2019 18:28:12 GMT
They enjoy barking up the wrong tree. I think we'll just leave it at barking apart from Partick of course Well they do say that barking dogs seldom bite. đŻ
|
|
|
Post by Dutchpeter on Feb 28, 2019 18:44:46 GMT
Iâm actually quite worried that free speech is in the hands of the next generation. If only Hitler had social media...
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Feb 28, 2019 18:59:43 GMT
Suzanne Evans is very mild mannered and considerate. It really is getting ridiculous. I guess that the problem lies in the fact that Twitter is an option in volunteer private system it has in fact captured a particular market, and the decisions on who to ban / guidelines on content can be interpreted subjectively and applied inconsistently, even though they are published and form part of the user agreement. All this social justice shit will end up eating itself. Hopefully these Tweets come out correctly, but incase they don't I'll give a quick explanation afterwards. Basically you now get banned from Twitter if you 'misgender' someone... But of course the 'misgendering' rules follow the far-lefts rule book. So if you're someone who doesn't believe a 'transwoman' is a woman, you believe they are a man, you'll get banned for your opinion. You can already hear the far-left cheering "Good, fuck off you transphobic cunt!". But then what happens when, lets say someone from an Islamic background from Saudi Arabia says a transwoman is a man? The Islamic/Arabic culture these people are brought up in says a man is a man & a woman is a woman, there is none of this 'trans' shit. So what do you do? Do you ban them for transphobia?... But isn't that awfully Islamophobic? Isn't that racist? Imposing your white, western beliefs onto all other cultures? Telling all other cultures & religions that they must bow down to your beliefs? It sounds awfully like the thing the far-left are apparently so against. All this identity politics, social justice bullshit is always doomed to fail.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Mar 1, 2019 12:15:18 GMT
Don't misgender 'it', or it's off to the gulags for you!
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Mar 1, 2019 19:44:36 GMT
Don't misgender 'it', or it's off to the gulags for you! What would you refer to it as ALF
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on May 15, 2019 17:55:55 GMT
I think that we have got to be careful as our freedom's are eroded. I don't think that the Police are correct here..... what if the person was wearing a motorcycle helmet or burqua?
And does the latest proposed definition of Isalmaphobiapreclude academic religious criticism. For example could we question on a Religious studies course at at university whether God / Allah would make contact with a Merchant in 6 th century Arabia and set out the unchallengeable rules for life for all cultures? ( supported by Labour.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on May 15, 2019 18:10:56 GMT
I think that we have got to be careful as our freedom's are eroded. I don't think that the Police are correct here..... what if the person was wearing a motorcycle helmet or burqua? And does the latest proposed definition of Isalmaphobiapreclude academic religious criticism. For example could we question on a Religious studies course at at university whether God / Allah would make contact with a " shepherd" in 6 th century Arabia and set out the unchallengeable rules for life for all cultures? ( supported by Labour. It's a rough one depends on what the area is, if the area has and is subject to disorder etc then the police have powers to enforce the removal of face coverings to stop people avoiding the consequences of their actions. If I remember right it's a section 60 order which has to be granted and is time limited.if it's 30°c and there is ongoing trouble and a person is wearing a wollen balaclava I would question their actions. If it's -30°c and no disorder then you would struggle to justify removing face coverings. Your pic is the only evidence the police can't collect with force you can refuse to pose or uncover. I'm of the opinion that cooperation is a good thing but know your rights.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on May 15, 2019 18:27:58 GMT
I think that we have got to be careful as our freedom's are eroded. I don't think that the Police are correct here..... what if the person was wearing a motorcycle helmet or burqua? And does the latest proposed definition of Isalmaphobiapreclude academic religious criticism. For example could we question on a Religious studies course at at university whether God / Allah would make contact with a " shepherd" in 6 th century Arabia and set out the unchallengeable rules for life for all cultures? ( supported by Labour. It's a rough one depends on what the area is, if the area has and is subject to disorder etc then the police have powers to enforce the removal of face coverings to stop people avoiding the consequences of their actions. If I remember right it's a section 60 order which has to be granted and is time limited.if it's 30°c and there is ongoing trouble and a person is wearing a wollen balaclava I would question their actions. If it's -30°c and no disorder then you would struggle to justify removing face coverings. Your pic is the only evidence the police can't collect with force you can refuse to pose or uncover. I'm of the opinion that cooperation is a good thing but know your rights. I agree Neil but I think we seem to be moving in a control, conform and be surveyed and monitored society , bit by bit by bit
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on May 15, 2019 18:45:45 GMT
It's a rough one depends on what the area is, if the area has and is subject to disorder etc then the police have powers to enforce the removal of face coverings to stop people avoiding the consequences of their actions. If I remember right it's a section 60 order which has to be granted and is time limited.if it's 30°c and there is ongoing trouble and a person is wearing a wollen balaclava I would question their actions. If it's -30°c and no disorder then you would struggle to justify removing face coverings. Your pic is the only evidence the police can't collect with force you can refuse to pose or uncover. I'm of the opinion that cooperation is a good thing but know your rights. I agree Neil but I think we seem to be moving in a control, conform and be surveyed and monitored society , bit by bit by bit Don't get me wrong I think all babies should give a DNA sample at birth, I think the more CCTV with face recognition the better. I've never had anything to hide and to be fair pretty boring so watch me all you want nothing exciting will happen. I'm just aware of the likes of Amnesty international etc and they are a ball ache. Today in PM Q' s it was mentioned about violent parents being given access to their children which puts them at risk including murder. This problem was caused by doo gooding tossers insisting children should see both parents, now when they get murdered it's wrong and needs sorting. The people who forced family court to do such a thing are nowhere near.
|
|
|
Post by Boothen on May 15, 2019 20:30:06 GMT
I think that we have got to be careful as our freedom's are eroded. I don't think that the Police are correct here..... what if the person was wearing a motorcycle helmet or burqua? What makes that even more unsettling is this. www.met.police.uk/live-facial-recognition-trial/
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on May 16, 2019 15:12:11 GMT
It's a rough one depends on what the area is, if the area has and is subject to disorder etc then the police have powers to enforce the removal of face coverings to stop people avoiding the consequences of their actions. If I remember right it's a section 60 order which has to be granted and is time limited.if it's 30°c and there is ongoing trouble and a person is wearing a wollen balaclava I would question their actions. If it's -30°c and no disorder then you would struggle to justify removing face coverings. Your pic is the only evidence the police can't collect with force you can refuse to pose or uncover. I'm of the opinion that cooperation is a good thing but know your rights. I agree Neil but I think we seem to be moving in a control, conform and be surveyed and monitored society , bit by bit by bit
Particularly when the guy from the Met at the end explains they are doing the trial to understand the concerns the public may have...yet when the public explain those concerns they are given on the spot fines simply for having those concerns in the first place...."we want to know what your concerns are so we can be better police, but if we don't like those concerns you'll get nicked"
Worrying times big john!
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on May 16, 2019 17:49:01 GMT
I see Morrissey is being slated for wearing a "right wing badge". Can't do links, but I agree with his explanation, and sentiments. Patriots are now racists.
|
|
|
Post by Boothen on May 16, 2019 18:15:19 GMT
Notice how the usual idiots think that the For Britain party is 'far-right' and that criticising Islam is 'racist'.
|
|
|
Post by zerps on May 16, 2019 18:20:56 GMT
Notice how the usual idiots think that the For Britain party is 'far-right' and that criticising Islam is 'racist'. Taking offence on behalf of others when thereâs literally no need is a new British past time. A nation of do gooders and bed wetters. This might not be received very well but at least theyâll be offended for themselves for once.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on May 16, 2019 18:22:46 GMT
Notice how the usual idiots think that the For Britain party is 'far-right' and that criticising Islam is 'racist'. Taking offence on behalf of others when thereâs literally no need is a new British past time. A nation of do gooders and bed wetters. This might not be received very well but at least theyâll be offended for themselves for once. What a good idea I could start the "I'll be offended for you party".
|
|
|
Post by zerps on May 16, 2019 18:26:24 GMT
Taking offence on behalf of others when thereâs literally no need is a new British past time. A nation of do gooders and bed wetters. This might not be received very well but at least theyâll be offended for themselves for once. What a good idea I could start the "I'll be offended for you party". Isnât that all of them? Apart from green peace who are offended for trees.
|
|
|
Post by zerps on May 16, 2019 18:33:45 GMT
If we donât constantly prove we care about everyone nowadays weâre instantly racist or lgbttbblphbbaphobic. Fuck that itâs a cruel world, nobody is getting out alive and you have to look after your own for as long as you can. Nobody else will.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on May 16, 2019 18:36:45 GMT
One of the best things about being British was freedom of speech, and the erosion of it is very sad and frightening. The last few years, something has happened. I don't know who's behind it, but it's really strange.
What's causing it?
|
|
|
Post by zerps on May 16, 2019 18:38:11 GMT
One of the best things about being British was freedom of speech, and the erosion of it is very sad and frightening. The last few years, something has happened. I don't know who's behind it, but it's really strange. What's causing it? We beat hitler to ensure freedom. Itâs slowly being quashed.
|
|
|
Post by mattyd on May 16, 2019 19:50:32 GMT
Don't misgender 'it', or it's off to the gulags for you! What would you refer to it as ALF Son.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on May 24, 2019 17:48:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on May 24, 2019 18:04:24 GMT
The person who complained- I wonder where they stood on the Shamima Begum debate?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jul 5, 2019 19:59:11 GMT
An exaggeration but a bit of truth in it. It can seem difficult to talk freely about everything and anything. /
|
|
|
Post by Boothen on Jul 5, 2019 22:36:29 GMT
As old Voltaire would say "If you want to know who controls you, look at who you are not allowed to criticize"!! It's a good quote, but it isn't actually a quote from Voltaire. That's a quote from Kevin Alfred Strom, a white supremacist paedophile.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Aug 8, 2019 19:17:20 GMT
This is never right in the eyes of right minded people. ( If true.....it seems unbelievable) Just imagine....16 years for being a free person in an oppressive system.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Aug 9, 2019 13:44:06 GMT
This is never right in the eyes of right minded people. ( If true.....it seems unbelievable) Just imagine....16 years for being a free person in an oppressive system. Its barbaric BJR in just hope we don't dilute British law to accommodate such beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 9, 2019 14:13:26 GMT
This is never right in the eyes of right minded people. ( If true.....it seems unbelievable) Just imagine....16 years for being a free person in an oppressive system. That's quite sickening to be honest. I hope the international community actually tries to do something for them rather then just whine on social media.
|
|
|
Post by Frogger Theft Auto on Aug 9, 2019 14:57:01 GMT
This is never right in the eyes of right minded people. ( If true.....it seems unbelievable) Just imagine....16 years for being a free person in an oppressive system. Its barbaric BJR in just hope we don't dilute British law to accommodate such beliefs. Reckon everybody will be so fed up of lefty liberal do-gooders moaning about bollocks and pretending to be offended by everything that the rest of the country will just say âfuck it, Iâm voting in somebody that makes women wear shit on their head just to spite those tossersâ?
|
|