|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Nov 7, 2024 18:17:14 GMT
Ok Paul without getting into a long drawn out discussion like I said I wouldn’t. Do I have a problem with people marching / protesting - “no” providing they’re peaceful and don’t impact on people’s lives eg preventing them from receiving medical care. Though I have to say they have a limited shelf life when those doing it ask themselves “what are we achieving” and “what are we looking to achieve.” Do I agree with the reason for all marches. “No” there’s plenty I don’t. Do I agree with the atrocities in Palestine? Of course not. Do I agree with the protests on Rememberance Sunday when people are trying to remember those that gave their lives for the UK in peace? “No” especially when they protest pretty much every other weekend in the year. If those protesting took this weekend off I think they’d get a lot of respect and support for the cause they’re marching for. Would I be pissed off if I was remembering a lost one or in the minutes silence if I could hear chanting in the background? Yes What are your thoughts re the Palestine protests? Do you think they’re actually achieving anything now? Have they lost there impact because they’re accepted as the norm so they don’t have any impact any more. I'm still unclear what your answer to the question is, as it again appears to be wrapped up in obfuscation. So my reply (which was going to be based on which answer you gave) will now have to be longer than I was originally hoping for. If your contention is that the pro-Palestine march specifically shouldn't be taking place because it is in some way disrespectful on Remberance Sunday, then I need to understand WHY you are linking the two entirely separate events and what makes one specifically disrespectful to the other? However, if your belief is that ALL marches should be banned on RS because they are disrespectful, then I'd suggest you should consider WHY the allies fought WW2. That being, to defeat Nazi occupation and the spread of Fascism, ultimately meaning that the likes of you and I, can live today as free citizens, with freedom of expression being at the very heart of our democratic rights. I know for certain, that my Grandfather would have been absolutely horrified, if, after all the sacrifices that he and his colleagues gave, that right was in someway curtailed on the very day that we remember their sacrifices, indeed curtailed directly BECAUSE of the Remberance, he'd be utterly appalled by that. In answer to your question, I think they are absolutely vital. In the last year, we've seen massive shifts in the positions of government's in France, Spain, Italy, Norway and Ireland amongst others and those shifts can be shown to be directly attributable to the citizens of those countries making clear, that they will not accept the actions of their government's in their name. Indeed, public opinion in the West, is the only chance that the Palestinian people now have left. Then we’ll have to agree to disagree as we’re singing from a very different political song sheet. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Nov 7, 2024 19:49:56 GMT
Ok Paul without getting into a long drawn out discussion like I said I wouldn’t. Do I have a problem with people marching / protesting - “no” providing they’re peaceful and don’t impact on people’s lives eg preventing them from receiving medical care. Though I have to say they have a limited shelf life when those doing it ask themselves “what are we achieving” and “what are we looking to achieve.” Do I agree with the reason for all marches. “No” there’s plenty I don’t. Do I agree with the atrocities in Palestine? Of course not. Do I agree with the protests on Rememberance Sunday when people are trying to remember those that gave their lives for the UK in peace? “No” especially when they protest pretty much every other weekend in the year. If those protesting took this weekend off I think they’d get a lot of respect and support for the cause they’re marching for. Would I be pissed off if I was remembering a lost one or in the minutes silence if I could hear chanting in the background? Yes What are your thoughts re the Palestine protests? Do you think they’re actually achieving anything now? Have they lost there impact because they’re accepted as the norm so they don’t have any impact any more. I'm still unclear what your answer to the question is, as it again appears to be wrapped up in obfuscation. So my reply (which was going to be based on which answer you gave) will now have to be longer than I was originally hoping for. If your contention is that the pro-Palestine march specifically shouldn't be taking place because it is in some way disrespectful on Remberance Sunday, then I need to understand WHY you are linking the two entirely separate events and what makes one specifically disrespectful to the other? However, if your belief is that ALL marches should be banned on RS because they are disrespectful, then I'd suggest you should consider WHY the allies fought WW2. That being, to defeat Nazi occupation and the spread of Fascism, ultimately meaning that the likes of you and I, can live today as free citizens, with freedom of expression being at the very heart of our democratic rights. I know for certain, that my Grandfather would have been absolutely horrified, if, after all the sacrifices that he and his colleagues gave, that right was in someway curtailed on the very day that we remember their sacrifices, indeed curtailed directly BECAUSE of the Remberance, he'd be utterly appalled by that. In answer to your question, I think they are absolutely vital. In the last year, we've seen massive shifts in the positions of government's in France, Spain, Italy, Norway and Ireland amongst others and those shifts can be shown to be directly attributable to the citizens of those countries making clear, that they will not accept the actions of their government's in their name. Indeed, public opinion in the West, is the only chance that the Palestinian people now have left. I believe what Jezza is trying to say is that it's disingenuous to ask and allow marches involving chants and banners either in favour of or against a current armed conflict happening elsewhere on the planet on the very same day the nation holds a deliberately solemn commemoration of the end of World War I and to remember those who have died in subsequent conflicts (i.e. Remembrance Day) The point people are making is that Remembrance Day is a time for reflection, gratitude, and paying tribute to the sacrifices made for peace and freedom. It is precisely not a time to protest current conflicts - that's for every other day of the year. |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Nov 7, 2024 19:51:27 GMT
I'm still unclear what your answer to the question is, as it again appears to be wrapped up in obfuscation. So my reply (which was going to be based on which answer you gave) will now have to be longer than I was originally hoping for. If your contention is that the pro-Palestine march specifically shouldn't be taking place because it is in some way disrespectful on Remberance Sunday, then I need to understand WHY you are linking the two entirely separate events and what makes one specifically disrespectful to the other? However, if your belief is that ALL marches should be banned on RS because they are disrespectful, then I'd suggest you should consider WHY the allies fought WW2. That being, to defeat Nazi occupation and the spread of Fascism, ultimately meaning that the likes of you and I, can live today as free citizens, with freedom of expression being at the very heart of our democratic rights. I know for certain, that my Grandfather would have been absolutely horrified, if, after all the sacrifices that he and his colleagues gave, that right was in someway curtailed on the very day that we remember their sacrifices, indeed curtailed directly BECAUSE of the Remberance, he'd be utterly appalled by that. In answer to your question, I think they are absolutely vital. In the last year, we've seen massive shifts in the positions of government's in France, Spain, Italy, Norway and Ireland amongst others and those shifts can be shown to be directly attributable to the citizens of those countries making clear, that they will not accept the actions of their government's in their name. Indeed, public opinion in the West, is the only chance that the Palestinian people now have left. I believe what Jezza is trying to say is that it's disingenuous to ask and allow marches involving chants and banners either in favour of or against a current armed conflict happening elsewhere on the planet on the very same day the nation holds a deliberately solemn commemoration of the end of World War I and to remember those who have died in subsequent conflicts (i.e. Remembrance Day) The point people are making is that Remembrance Day is a time for reflection, gratitude, and paying tribute to the sacrifices made for peace and freedom. It is precisely not a time to protest current conflicts - that's for every other day of the year. Perfectly put. I’m sure someone will disagree though |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Nov 7, 2024 19:55:50 GMT
I'm still unclear what your answer to the question is, as it again appears to be wrapped up in obfuscation. So my reply (which was going to be based on which answer you gave) will now have to be longer than I was originally hoping for. If your contention is that the pro-Palestine march specifically shouldn't be taking place because it is in some way disrespectful on Remberance Sunday, then I need to understand WHY you are linking the two entirely separate events and what makes one specifically disrespectful to the other? However, if your belief is that ALL marches should be banned on RS because they are disrespectful, then I'd suggest you should consider WHY the allies fought WW2. That being, to defeat Nazi occupation and the spread of Fascism, ultimately meaning that the likes of you and I, can live today as free citizens, with freedom of expression being at the very heart of our democratic rights. I know for certain, that my Grandfather would have been absolutely horrified, if, after all the sacrifices that he and his colleagues gave, that right was in someway curtailed on the very day that we remember their sacrifices, indeed curtailed directly BECAUSE of the Remberance, he'd be utterly appalled by that. In answer to your question, I think they are absolutely vital. In the last year, we've seen massive shifts in the positions of government's in France, Spain, Italy, Norway and Ireland amongst others and those shifts can be shown to be directly attributable to the citizens of those countries making clear, that they will not accept the actions of their government's in their name. Indeed, public opinion in the West, is the only chance that the Palestinian people now have left. I believe what Jezza is trying to say is that it's disingenuous to ask and allow marches involving chants and banners either in favour of or against a current armed conflict happening elsewhere on the planet on the very same day the nation holds a deliberately solemn commemoration of the end of World War I and to remember those who have died in subsequent conflicts (i.e. Remembrance Day) The point people are making is that Remembrance Day is a time for reflection, gratitude, and paying tribute to the sacrifices made for peace and freedom. It is precisely not a time to protest current conflicts - that's for every other day of the year. Spot on. It’s good to know that someone could understand my rambling. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 7, 2024 20:21:51 GMT
I'm still unclear what your answer to the question is, as it again appears to be wrapped up in obfuscation. So my reply (which was going to be based on which answer you gave) will now have to be longer than I was originally hoping for. If your contention is that the pro-Palestine march specifically shouldn't be taking place because it is in some way disrespectful on Remberance Sunday, then I need to understand WHY you are linking the two entirely separate events and what makes one specifically disrespectful to the other? However, if your belief is that ALL marches should be banned on RS because they are disrespectful, then I'd suggest you should consider WHY the allies fought WW2. That being, to defeat Nazi occupation and the spread of Fascism, ultimately meaning that the likes of you and I, can live today as free citizens, with freedom of expression being at the very heart of our democratic rights. I know for certain, that my Grandfather would have been absolutely horrified, if, after all the sacrifices that he and his colleagues gave, that right was in someway curtailed on the very day that we remember their sacrifices, indeed curtailed directly BECAUSE of the Remberance, he'd be utterly appalled by that. In answer to your question, I think they are absolutely vital. In the last year, we've seen massive shifts in the positions of government's in France, Spain, Italy, Norway and Ireland amongst others and those shifts can be shown to be directly attributable to the citizens of those countries making clear, that they will not accept the actions of their government's in their name. Indeed, public opinion in the West, is the only chance that the Palestinian people now have left. I believe what Jezza is trying to say is that it's disingenuous to ask and allow marches involving chants and banners either in favour of or against a current armed conflict happening elsewhere on the planet on the very same day the nation holds a deliberately solemn commemoration of the end of World War I and to remember those who have died in subsequent conflicts (i.e. Remembrance Day) The point people are making is that Remembrance Day is a time for reflection, gratitude, and paying tribute to the sacrifices made for peace and freedom. It is precisely not a time to protest current conflicts - that's for every other day of the year. Which is a perfectly reasonable position to adopt. As I said above, I'm not sure my Grandfather would agree but I take your point. |
|
|
|
Post by Chewbacca the Wookie on Nov 7, 2024 20:50:11 GMT
I believe what Jezza is trying to say is that it's disingenuous to ask and allow marches involving chants and banners either in favour of or against a current armed conflict happening elsewhere on the planet on the very same day the nation holds a deliberately solemn commemoration of the end of World War I and to remember those who have died in subsequent conflicts (i.e. Remembrance Day) The point people are making is that Remembrance Day is a time for reflection, gratitude, and paying tribute to the sacrifices made for peace and freedom. It is precisely not a time to protest current conflicts - that's for every other day of the year. Which is a perfectly reasonable position to adopt. As I said above, I'm not sure my Grandfather would agree but I take your point. I don’t think my grandfather would agree with your grandfather but that’s the way of the world  |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Nov 7, 2024 20:52:49 GMT
Which is a perfectly reasonable position to adopt. As I said above, I'm not sure my Grandfather would agree but I take your point. I don’t think my grandfather would agree with your grandfather but that’s the way of the world Mine neither |
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Nov 7, 2024 20:54:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Foster on Nov 7, 2024 21:22:28 GMT
I don’t think my grandfather would agree with your grandfather but that’s the way of the world Mine neither You'd have to be a proper wanker to disrespect remembrance day or any other similar day of reflection. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Nov 7, 2024 21:23:39 GMT
I believe what Jezza is trying to say is that it's disingenuous to ask and allow marches involving chants and banners either in favour of or against a current armed conflict happening elsewhere on the planet on the very same day the nation holds a deliberately solemn commemoration of the end of World War I and to remember those who have died in subsequent conflicts (i.e. Remembrance Day) The point people are making is that Remembrance Day is a time for reflection, gratitude, and paying tribute to the sacrifices made for peace and freedom. It is precisely not a time to protest current conflicts - that's for every other day of the year. Which is a perfectly reasonable position to adopt. As I said above, I'm not sure my Grandfather would agree but I take your point. Oh, I know yeah - and I totally understand that point of view. It's just that's what I think Jezza meant. |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Nov 8, 2024 6:32:58 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by 4372 on Nov 8, 2024 6:58:20 GMT
I reckon they will close the hotels before long. There is clearly plenty of room for the immigrants to live here, in the heads of the rabid right wingers. |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Nov 8, 2024 7:01:26 GMT
I reckon they will close the hotels before long. There is clearly plenty of room for the immigrants to live here, in the heads of the rabid right wingers. Million Manhoef? |
|
|
|
Post by iancransonsknees on Nov 8, 2024 7:13:10 GMT
I reckon they will close the hotels before long. There is clearly plenty of room for the immigrants to live here, in the heads of the rabid right wingers. Million Manhoef? You're getting your rapid and rabid mixed up there. |
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Nov 8, 2024 7:16:35 GMT
You're getting your rapid and rabid mixed up there. Rapid is not a word I’d use to describe him |
|
|
|
Post by phileetin on Nov 8, 2024 9:39:32 GMT
Where white men can go to grab them by the pussy you mean? Or do the Weinstein? Or Saville? see , that's what i'm getting at .
it's becoming accepted by the tolerant people (you) in this cuntry and sooner or later these acceptable cultural practices will be legal and by logical extrapolation so will paedophilia , otherwise that would be classed as cultural discrimination ie groomers can fiddle but not rolf .
|
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 8, 2024 18:11:58 GMT
Where white men can go to grab them by the pussy you mean? Or do the Weinstein? Or Saville? see , that's what i'm getting at .
it's becoming accepted by the tolerant people (you) in this cuntry and sooner or later these acceptable cultural practices will be legal and by logical extrapolation so will paedophilia , otherwise that would be classed as cultural discrimination ie groomers can fiddle but not rolf .
🤣 |
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Nov 9, 2024 9:19:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by 4372 on Nov 9, 2024 10:17:06 GMT
Where these people live is right inside the heads of other people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ariel Manto on Nov 9, 2024 10:19:49 GMT
Where these people live is right inside the heads of other people. Like sperm cells in a scrotum…. |
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Nov 9, 2024 16:49:42 GMT
It's the Cresta Court in the middle of the town, I've stayed there a few times, won't be good for the town. |
|
|
|
Post by middleoftheboothen on Nov 9, 2024 18:40:00 GMT
It's the Cresta Court in the middle of the town, I've stayed there a few times, won't be good for the town. Illegal immigrants aren't good for any town at any time mate. The word 'illegal' says it all. Unfortunately the people who bury their heads in the sand about the issue aren't the ones who get affected by them being here. |
|
|
|
Post by probably on Nov 9, 2024 18:51:36 GMT
It's the Cresta Court in the middle of the town, I've stayed there a few times, won't be good for the town. Illegal immigrants aren't good for any town at any time mate. The word 'illegal' says it all. Unfortunately the people who bury their heads in the sand about the issue aren't the ones who get affected by them being here. Not sure it's burying heads in the sand, more than it is people looking to highlight the difference between genuine asylum seekers and illegal immigrants. People have to travel to the UK to claim asylum. People (for they truly are people) can only claim asylum if they are overseas in very few circumstances. |
|
|
|
Post by middleoftheboothen on Nov 9, 2024 20:49:58 GMT
Illegal immigrants aren't good for any town at any time mate. The word 'illegal' says it all. Unfortunately the people who bury their heads in the sand about the issue aren't the ones who get affected by them being here. Not sure it's burying heads in the sand, more than it is people looking to highlight the difference between genuine asylum seekers and illegal immigrants. People have to travel to the UK to claim asylum. People (for they truly are people) can only claim asylum if they are overseas in very few circumstances. The post was specifically about illegal immigrants mate. |
|
|
|
Post by probably on Nov 9, 2024 20:52:42 GMT
Not sure it's burying heads in the sand, more than it is people looking to highlight the difference between genuine asylum seekers and illegal immigrants. People have to travel to the UK to claim asylum. People (for they truly are people) can only claim asylum if they are overseas in very few circumstances. The post was specifically about illegal immigrants mate. Yes I know pal. Which is why I said some people don’t know the difference between illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. |
|
|
|
Post by middleoftheboothen on Nov 9, 2024 20:55:05 GMT
The post was specifically about illegal immigrants mate. Yes I know pal. Which is why I said some people don’t know the difference between illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Not sure what you are getting at mate. If they are illegal they shouldn't be here. |
|
|
|
Post by probably on Nov 9, 2024 21:04:25 GMT
Yes I know pal. Which is why I said some people don’t know the difference between illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Not sure what you are getting at mate. If they are illegal they shouldn't be here. Yeah I know. I’m just making the point that there is often confusion between illegal immigrants and asylum seekers in the UK and that the terms are often used interchangeably. There aren’t many safe routes in to the UK so many people have to enter the UK illegally before claiming asylum. Of course, those who enter or stay in the UK without legal permission and don’t claim asylum should be returned.Those individuals who have fled their home countries due to persecution or fear of persecution and are seeking protection in the UK, who enter the UK illegally to claim asylum should be allowed to claim asylum. Both groups tend to arrive in the UK through illegal means, such as crossing the Channel in small boats. I’m just making the point, that’s all 😊 |
|
|
|
Post by middleoftheboothen on Nov 9, 2024 21:11:34 GMT
Not sure what you are getting at mate. If they are illegal they shouldn't be here. Yeah I know. I’m just making the point that there is often confusion between illegal immigrants and asylum seekers in the UK and that the terms are often used interchangeably. There aren’t many safe routes in to the UK so many people have to enter the UK illegally before claiming asylum. Of course, those who enter or stay in the UK without legal permission and don’t claim asylum should be returned.Those individuals who have fled their home countries due to persecution or fear of persecution and are seeking protection in the UK, who enter the UK illegally to claim asylum should be allowed to claim asylum. Both groups tend to arrive in the UK through illegal means, such as crossing the Channel in small boats. I’m just making the point, that’s all 😊 France is also a safe country so not sure why they need to cross the channel and risk their lives doing so if their reason for coming here is to escape persecution. They wouldn't be persecuted in France would they? |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 9, 2024 21:39:40 GMT
Are they illegal? Or is it that their claims haven’t been processed yet? If they are unvetted, how do you know they are from countries that don’t share our values? And they cannot be illegal if they are unvetted as they only become illegal once an asylum claim is rejected and they remain here. Why is it relevant that they are being temporarily housed close to two girls schools? |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 9, 2024 21:42:14 GMT
Not sure it's burying heads in the sand, more than it is people looking to highlight the difference between genuine asylum seekers and illegal immigrants. People have to travel to the UK to claim asylum. People (for they truly are people) can only claim asylum if they are overseas in very few circumstances. The post was specifically about illegal immigrants mate. So all of them have had their asylum claims processed and rejected? If so, they should be returned to their home countries. They can’t be unvetted though if that is true. If they are unvetted they cannot be illegal because it mean their claims to asylum haven’t been processed. The post is a complete contradiction. |
|
