Luton "Anti war demo"

[Park Life 70]

People need to be able to/encouraged to celebrate their differences, not all try and become the same. The complex web of motivations and desires that drive our society enriches it.

[Renton 17856]

People need to be able to/encouraged to celebrate their differences, not all try and become the same. The complex web of motivations and desires that drive our society enriches it.

 

To an extent but the indoctrination of children also ultimately encourages discord, intolerance and bigotry throughout society. Plenty of examples of this, from Northern Ireland to Israel. Not to mention here, clearly.

[LeazesMag 0]

a hand wringer like you would be far too horrified man

 

As I said, its gone a long way down the line now. Interesting that you are slightly looking for common ground though, as a while back you just insisted that people who held the view similar to mine were rabid, racist, stupid [words to that effect]. A pretty similar u-turn to the one I linked you to last week and your denial of claiming you harped on about "planning" by the football club. Anything other than admitting you got it wrong.

 

I'm as certain as I can be that while hand wringers like you turn a blind eye to this situation in the country, it will continue to get worse, with increasing momentum.

 

Ref your "solution", I'm sure you realise deep down that muslims have no intention whatsoever of encompassing any other religion but their own, nor condemning the disgraceful racist behaviour in Luton last week.

 

As mentioned, the whole lot of them ought to have been banged up just like what would have happened had it been a white man hurling venom at a muslim gathering. In fact, banging them up gives us an opportunity of getting hold of those who have no right to be here. Now thats what I call a "starter".

 

 

 

Jesus wept man Leazes. I haven't done any u-turns, now or about 'planning' (I've always thought it a good idea to 'plan' the very next manager before sacking the incumbent, do you really disagree with this)???? Anyway, ffs, stop point-scoring and trying to derail the conversation to yet another Shepherd snore fest.

 

My solution would be one of integration, in a nutshell. No faith schools would mean less divison in the next generation, period. Christian schools would have to go too mind. And if people didn't like it, they would be welcome to look for a different country to live in. I'd hardly think that makes me a hand wringer, but then again I'm not a sandal wearing Guardian reader either, I'm pretty much central in ideology regarding politics in all probability. To you though that makes me a loony leftist.

 

Now what is this idea I'd be too horrified to know about. Deportation of illegal immigrants? No, I'm all for that and I'm pretty sure that's what happens to people who are caught out. But the problem stems from people legally living here, you know that, don't you? So my guess is what you're really talking about is enforced repatriation. So a serious question, how would it work? I'd honestly like to know, because I can't see any sensible way how it could, even if it was desirable.

 

Integration isn't working, because hand wringers like you - but worse - are insisting that people like me [and worse] who say they should adapt to our ways or fuck off, are "racists". We will not get integrated schools with muslim kids learning how to be British citizens in favour of their muslim "schooling", and you know it. In fact, it will only go the opposite way, as is happening, ref the link I posted last week, which you [unsurprisingly] defended.

 

I can say with absolute certainty, that in 20 years down the line, this whole situation will be a lot worse than today, and if you have half a brain and are prepared to admit it, will say that what I am saying now is absolutely correct.

 

The comparison with the football club is relevant, I'm only pointing out that you, being such a smart lad, have been shown to be completely wrong but won't admit it. And time will prove you wrong again.

 

Quite simply, people won't look for a different country to live in, because we make it too comfortable here for them, when we ought to have had firmer controls in the first place. I didn't say enforced repatriation by the way, but there are plenty of cunts in this country who we should kick out and if the legal system prevents it, then change the legal system. Do you know that police are guarding the house of one of those scumbags in Luton last week ? Why don't they guard a British man who protests against those who refuse to conform to the traditions of this country instead of banging him up ?

 

We do have a choice in the matter of teaching our kids to learn urdu, and other such bollocks, and building schools for these racists, and the simple answer is to stop doing it and again, if they don't like it, then tough shit, they can bugger off back to where they came from.

 

Your idealistic integrated society will never work, never. The only thing it will do is continue dividing the country.

 

And wtf is a photo of Jack Nicholson got to do with it ? What planet do you live on

Edited March 19, 2009 by LeazesMag

[Renton 17856]

a hand wringer like you would be far too horrified man

 

As I said, its gone a long way down the line now. Interesting that you are slightly looking for common ground though, as a while back you just insisted that people who held the view similar to mine were rabid, racist, stupid [words to that effect]. A pretty similar u-turn to the one I linked you to last week and your denial of claiming you harped on about "planning" by the football club. Anything other than admitting you got it wrong.

 

I'm as certain as I can be that while hand wringers like you turn a blind eye to this situation in the country, it will continue to get worse, with increasing momentum.

 

Ref your "solution", I'm sure you realise deep down that muslims have no intention whatsoever of encompassing any other religion but their own, nor condemning the disgraceful racist behaviour in Luton last week.

 

As mentioned, the whole lot of them ought to have been banged up just like what would have happened had it been a white man hurling venom at a muslim gathering. In fact, banging them up gives us an opportunity of getting hold of those who have no right to be here. Now thats what I call a "starter".

 

 

 

Jesus wept man Leazes. I haven't done any u-turns, now or about 'planning' (I've always thought it a good idea to 'plan' the very next manager before sacking the incumbent, do you really disagree with this)???? Anyway, ffs, stop point-scoring and trying to derail the conversation to yet another Shepherd snore fest.

 

My solution would be one of integration, in a nutshell. No faith schools would mean less divison in the next generation, period. Christian schools would have to go too mind. And if people didn't like it, they would be welcome to look for a different country to live in. I'd hardly think that makes me a hand wringer, but then again I'm not a sandal wearing Guardian reader either, I'm pretty much central in ideology regarding politics in all probability. To you though that makes me a loony leftist.

 

Now what is this idea I'd be too horrified to know about. Deportation of illegal immigrants? No, I'm all for that and I'm pretty sure that's what happens to people who are caught out. But the problem stems from people legally living here, you know that, don't you? So my guess is what you're really talking about is enforced repatriation. So a serious question, how would it work? I'd honestly like to know, because I can't see any sensible way how it could, even if it was desirable.

 

Integration isn't working, because hand wringers like you - but worse - are insisting that people like me [and worse] who say they should adapt to our ways or fuck off, are "racists". We will not get integrated schools with muslim kids learning how to be British citizens in favour of their muslim "schooling", and you know it. In fact, it will only go the opposite way, as is happening, ref the link I posted last week, which you [unsurprisingly] defended.

 

I can say with absolute certainty, that in 20 years down the line, this whole situation will be a lot worse than today, and if you have half a brain and are prepared to admit it, will say that what I am saying now is absolutely correct.

 

The comparison with the football club is relevant, I'm only pointing out that you, being such a smart lad, have been shown to be completely wrong but won't admit it. And time will prove you wrong again.

 

Quite simply, people won't look for a different country to live in, because we make it too comfortable here for them, when we ought to have had firmer controls in the first place. I didn't say enforced repatriation by the way, but there are plenty of cunts in this country who we should kick out and if the legal system prevents it, then change the legal system. Do you know that police are guarding the house of one of those scumbags in Luton last week ? Why don't they guard a British man who protests against those who refuse to conform to the traditions of this country instead of banging him up ?

 

We do have a choice in the matter of teaching our kids to learn urdu, and other such bollocks, and building schools for these racists, and the simple answer is to stop doing it and again, if they don't like it, then tough shit, they can bugger off back to where they came from.

 

Your idealistic integrated society will never work, never. The only thing it will do is continue dividing the country.

 

And wtf is a photo of Jack Nicholson got to do with it ? What planet do you live on

 

The photo was a joke Leazes about a character you remind me of re: the bit I bolded. An attempt to lighten matters, but just forget it. Clearly all your interested in doing is ranting/point-scoring/name-calling. Even attempts at trying to establish some common ground with you leads to accusations I'm doing a u-turn and subsequent diversions into ancient football arguments. But, trying to stay on topic, I'd like to clarify your (indirect) answer to my question. Regarding changing the legal system to 'kick the cunts out', how do you do this? Where exactly do you forcibly send them to and what makes you think the recipient country would want them? I'd say that was quite a big practical flaw in your 'hard answer'. And to my knowledge you haven't offered anything else.

 

P.S. Secularisation isn't synonymous with integration, although there is some overlap, I'd agree. I'm just think it offers a much better hope for all than multiculturism, which has led us to where we are. I'm against muslim schools btw or learning urdu so some of your comments above aren't really directed at me, are they? In fact they completely miss the point.

 

P.P.S. If you can't be bothered to answer without ranting, point-scoring, question-evading, Shepherd-loving, and generally being insulting, don't bother. It's a waste of both our times.

[LeazesMag 0]

a hand wringer like you would be far too horrified man

 

As I said, its gone a long way down the line now. Interesting that you are slightly looking for common ground though, as a while back you just insisted that people who held the view similar to mine were rabid, racist, stupid [words to that effect]. A pretty similar u-turn to the one I linked you to last week and your denial of claiming you harped on about "planning" by the football club. Anything other than admitting you got it wrong.

 

I'm as certain as I can be that while hand wringers like you turn a blind eye to this situation in the country, it will continue to get worse, with increasing momentum.

 

Ref your "solution", I'm sure you realise deep down that muslims have no intention whatsoever of encompassing any other religion but their own, nor condemning the disgraceful racist behaviour in Luton last week.

 

As mentioned, the whole lot of them ought to have been banged up just like what would have happened had it been a white man hurling venom at a muslim gathering. In fact, banging them up gives us an opportunity of getting hold of those who have no right to be here. Now thats what I call a "starter".

 

 

 

Jesus wept man Leazes. I haven't done any u-turns, now or about 'planning' (I've always thought it a good idea to 'plan' the very next manager before sacking the incumbent, do you really disagree with this)???? Anyway, ffs, stop point-scoring and trying to derail the conversation to yet another Shepherd snore fest.

 

My solution would be one of integration, in a nutshell. No faith schools would mean less divison in the next generation, period. Christian schools would have to go too mind. And if people didn't like it, they would be welcome to look for a different country to live in. I'd hardly think that makes me a hand wringer, but then again I'm not a sandal wearing Guardian reader either, I'm pretty much central in ideology regarding politics in all probability. To you though that makes me a loony leftist.

 

Now what is this idea I'd be too horrified to know about. Deportation of illegal immigrants? No, I'm all for that and I'm pretty sure that's what happens to people who are caught out. But the problem stems from people legally living here, you know that, don't you? So my guess is what you're really talking about is enforced repatriation. So a serious question, how would it work? I'd honestly like to know, because I can't see any sensible way how it could, even if it was desirable.

 

Integration isn't working, because hand wringers like you - but worse - are insisting that people like me [and worse] who say they should adapt to our ways or fuck off, are "racists". We will not get integrated schools with muslim kids learning how to be British citizens in favour of their muslim "schooling", and you know it. In fact, it will only go the opposite way, as is happening, ref the link I posted last week, which you [unsurprisingly] defended.

 

I can say with absolute certainty, that in 20 years down the line, this whole situation will be a lot worse than today, and if you have half a brain and are prepared to admit it, will say that what I am saying now is absolutely correct.

 

The comparison with the football club is relevant, I'm only pointing out that you, being such a smart lad, have been shown to be completely wrong but won't admit it. And time will prove you wrong again.

 

Quite simply, people won't look for a different country to live in, because we make it too comfortable here for them, when we ought to have had firmer controls in the first place. I didn't say enforced repatriation by the way, but there are plenty of cunts in this country who we should kick out and if the legal system prevents it, then change the legal system. Do you know that police are guarding the house of one of those scumbags in Luton last week ? Why don't they guard a British man who protests against those who refuse to conform to the traditions of this country instead of banging him up ?

 

We do have a choice in the matter of teaching our kids to learn urdu, and other such bollocks, and building schools for these racists, and the simple answer is to stop doing it and again, if they don't like it, then tough shit, they can bugger off back to where they came from.

 

Your idealistic integrated society will never work, never. The only thing it will do is continue dividing the country.

 

And wtf is a photo of Jack Nicholson got to do with it ? What planet do you live on

 

The photo was a joke Leazes about a character you remind me of re: the bit I bolded. An attempt to lighten matters, but just forget it. Clearly all your interested in doing is ranting/point-scoring/name-calling. Even attempts at trying to establish some common ground with you leads to accusations I'm doing a u-turn and subsequent diversions into ancient football arguments. But, trying to stay on topic, I'd like to clarify your (indirect) answer to my question. Regarding changing the legal system to 'kick the cunts out', how do you do this? Where exactly do you forcibly send them to and what makes you think the recipient country would want them? I'd say that was quite a big practical flaw in your 'hard answer'. And to my knowledge you haven't offered anything else.

 

P.S. Secularisation isn't synonymous with integration, although there is some overlap, I'd agree. I'm just think it offers a much better hope for all than multiculturism, which has led us to where we are. I'm against muslim schools btw or learning urdu so some of your comments above aren't really directed at me, are they? In fact they completely miss the point.

 

P.P.S. If you can't be bothered to answer without ranting, point-scoring, question-evading, Shepherd-loving , and generally being insulting, don't bother. It's a waste of both our times.

 

 

the usual comment, rather than admit that their successors have got nowhere near matching them. I asked you before, and I don't think you replied, what will you say in 15-20 years down the line and we still haven't matched the Halls and Shepherd ?

Will you then - like me - understand that they were a good board, [which is all I've ever said] and far better than you thought or said at the time ?

 

I might reply to the rest later.

[LeazesMag 0]

a hand wringer like you would be far too horrified man

 

As I said, its gone a long way down the line now. Interesting that you are slightly looking for common ground though, as a while back you just insisted that people who held the view similar to mine were rabid, racist, stupid [words to that effect]. A pretty similar u-turn to the one I linked you to last week and your denial of claiming you harped on about "planning" by the football club. Anything other than admitting you got it wrong.

 

I'm as certain as I can be that while hand wringers like you turn a blind eye to this situation in the country, it will continue to get worse, with increasing momentum.

 

Ref your "solution", I'm sure you realise deep down that muslims have no intention whatsoever of encompassing any other religion but their own, nor condemning the disgraceful racist behaviour in Luton last week.

 

As mentioned, the whole lot of them ought to have been banged up just like what would have happened had it been a white man hurling venom at a muslim gathering. In fact, banging them up gives us an opportunity of getting hold of those who have no right to be here. Now thats what I call a "starter".

 

 

 

Jesus wept man Leazes. I haven't done any u-turns, now or about 'planning' (I've always thought it a good idea to 'plan' the very next manager before sacking the incumbent, do you really disagree with this)???? Anyway, ffs, stop point-scoring and trying to derail the conversation to yet another Shepherd snore fest.

 

My solution would be one of integration, in a nutshell. No faith schools would mean less divison in the next generation, period. Christian schools would have to go too mind. And if people didn't like it, they would be welcome to look for a different country to live in. I'd hardly think that makes me a hand wringer, but then again I'm not a sandal wearing Guardian reader either, I'm pretty much central in ideology regarding politics in all probability. To you though that makes me a loony leftist.

 

Now what is this idea I'd be too horrified to know about. Deportation of illegal immigrants? No, I'm all for that and I'm pretty sure that's what happens to people who are caught out. But the problem stems from people legally living here, you know that, don't you? So my guess is what you're really talking about is enforced repatriation. So a serious question, how would it work? I'd honestly like to know, because I can't see any sensible way how it could, even if it was desirable.

 

Integration isn't working, because hand wringers like you - but worse - are insisting that people like me [and worse] who say they should adapt to our ways or fuck off, are "racists". We will not get integrated schools with muslim kids learning how to be British citizens in favour of their muslim "schooling", and you know it. In fact, it will only go the opposite way, as is happening, ref the link I posted last week, which you [unsurprisingly] defended.

 

I can say with absolute certainty, that in 20 years down the line, this whole situation will be a lot worse than today, and if you have half a brain and are prepared to admit it, will say that what I am saying now is absolutely correct.

 

The comparison with the football club is relevant, I'm only pointing out that you, being such a smart lad, have been shown to be completely wrong but won't admit it. And time will prove you wrong again.

 

Quite simply, people won't look for a different country to live in, because we make it too comfortable here for them, when we ought to have had firmer controls in the first place. I didn't say enforced repatriation by the way, but there are plenty of cunts in this country who we should kick out and if the legal system prevents it, then change the legal system. Do you know that police are guarding the house of one of those scumbags in Luton last week ? Why don't they guard a British man who protests against those who refuse to conform to the traditions of this country instead of banging him up ?

 

We do have a choice in the matter of teaching our kids to learn urdu, and other such bollocks, and building schools for these racists, and the simple answer is to stop doing it and again, if they don't like it, then tough shit, they can bugger off back to where they came from.

 

Your idealistic integrated society will never work, never. The only thing it will do is continue dividing the country.

 

And wtf is a photo of Jack Nicholson got to do with it ? What planet do you live on

 

The photo was a joke Leazes about a character you remind me of re: the bit I bolded. An attempt to lighten matters, but just forget it. Clearly all your interested in doing is ranting/point-scoring/name-calling. Even attempts at trying to establish some common ground with you leads to accusations I'm doing a u-turn and subsequent diversions into ancient football arguments. But, trying to stay on topic, I'd like to clarify your (indirect) answer to my question. Regarding changing the legal system to 'kick the cunts out', how do you do this? Where exactly do you forcibly send them to and what makes you think the recipient country would want them? I'd say that was quite a big practical flaw in your 'hard answer'. And to my knowledge you haven't offered anything else.

 

P.S. Secularisation isn't synonymous with integration, although there is some overlap, I'd agree. I'm just think it offers a much better hope for all than multiculturism, which has led us to where we are. I'm against muslim schools btw or learning urdu so some of your comments above aren't really directed at me, are they? In fact they completely miss the point.

 

P.P.S. If you can't be bothered to answer without ranting, point-scoring, question-evading, Shepherd-loving , and generally being insulting, don't bother. It's a waste of both our times.

 

 

the usual childish, moronic, comment, rather than admit that their successors have got nowhere near matching them. I asked you before, and I don't think you replied, what will you say in 15-20 years down the line and we still haven't matched the Halls and Shepherd ?

Will you then - like me - understand that they were a good board, [which is all I've ever said] and far better than you thought or said at the time ?

 

I might reply to the rest later.

Edited March 19, 2009 by LeazesMag

[Renton 17856]

the usual childish, moronic, comment, rather than admit that their successors have got nowhere near matching them. I asked you before, and I don't think you replied, what will you say in 15-20 years down the line and we still haven't matched the Halls and Shepherd ?

Will you then - like me - understand that they were a good board, [which is all I've ever said] and far better than you thought or said at the time ?

 

I might reply to the rest later.

 

Ha ha, I'm the childish one?

 

I did answer that question Leazes, you obviously didn't bother reading it. You're obsession with Shepherd and your need to point-score regarding him, again demonstrated by this post which is not even in the football forum, is as sad as it is utterly boring. The same old dross, repeated literally for years now, before you know it it will be decades. Count me out, don't bother replying, you've shown you're beyond help.

[Park Life 70]

People need to be able to/encouraged to celebrate their differences, not all try and become the same. The complex web of motivations and desires that drive our society enriches it.

 

To an extent but the indoctrination of children also ultimately encourages discord, intolerance and bigotry throughout society. Plenty of examples of this, from Northern Ireland to Israel. Not to mention here, clearly.

 

I agree. The indoctrination of children is a hideous crime.

[Guest alex]

I don't know what the answers are but confrontation isn't the solution. I'll go back to my lentil curry now.

[Fop 1]

You don't seem to understand the basic linkage between Home Office policy and policing with regard to particular scenarios. With this ignorance in mind you happily quoted the miners strike earlier. I really don't need to explain do I?

 

It's called institutional racism, and is the difference between one group being able to do this:

 

 

and the police stand by and let them, whilst most any other group would have been mown under a police horse charge for something similar.

 

 

To advocate that every situation should be treated exactly the same is just naivity on your behalf Fop. I don't think we're ever going to agree on that though so I'd just accept it as an impasse.

 

 

 

So you are basically saying that people should be policed DIFFERENTLY based on their beliefs/relgion/skin colour?

 

 

That puts you in some heady company.

[Park Life 70]

a hand wringer like you would be far too horrified man

 

As I said, its gone a long way down the line now. Interesting that you are slightly looking for common ground though, as a while back you just insisted that people who held the view similar to mine were rabid, racist, stupid [words to that effect]. A pretty similar u-turn to the one I linked you to last week and your denial of claiming you harped on about "planning" by the football club. Anything other than admitting you got it wrong.

 

I'm as certain as I can be that while hand wringers like you turn a blind eye to this situation in the country, it will continue to get worse, with increasing momentum.

 

Ref your "solution", I'm sure you realise deep down that muslims have no intention whatsoever of encompassing any other religion but their own, nor condemning the disgraceful racist behaviour in Luton last week.

 

As mentioned, the whole lot of them ought to have been banged up just like what would have happened had it been a white man hurling venom at a muslim gathering. In fact, banging them up gives us an opportunity of getting hold of those who have no right to be here. Now thats what I call a "starter".

 

 

 

Jesus wept man Leazes. I haven't done any u-turns, now or about 'planning' (I've always thought it a good idea to 'plan' the very next manager before sacking the incumbent, do you really disagree with this)???? Anyway, ffs, stop point-scoring and trying to derail the conversation to yet another Shepherd snore fest.

 

My solution would be one of integration, in a nutshell. No faith schools would mean less divison in the next generation, period. Christian schools would have to go too mind. And if people didn't like it, they would be welcome to look for a different country to live in. I'd hardly think that makes me a hand wringer, but then again I'm not a sandal wearing Guardian reader either, I'm pretty much central in ideology regarding politics in all probability. To you though that makes me a loony leftist.

 

Now what is this idea I'd be too horrified to know about. Deportation of illegal immigrants? No, I'm all for that and I'm pretty sure that's what happens to people who are caught out. But the problem stems from people legally living here, you know that, don't you? So my guess is what you're really talking about is enforced repatriation. So a serious question, how would it work? I'd honestly like to know, because I can't see any sensible way how it could, even if it was desirable.

 

Integration isn't working, because hand wringers like you - but worse - are insisting that people like me [and worse] who say they should adapt to our ways or fuck off, are "racists". We will not get integrated schools with muslim kids learning how to be British citizens in favour of their muslim "schooling", and you know it. In fact, it will only go the opposite way, as is happening, ref the link I posted last week, which you [unsurprisingly] defended.

 

I can say with absolute certainty, that in 20 years down the line, this whole situation will be a lot worse than today, and if you have half a brain and are prepared to admit it, will say that what I am saying now is absolutely correct.

 

The comparison with the football club is relevant, I'm only pointing out that you, being such a smart lad, have been shown to be completely wrong but won't admit it. And time will prove you wrong again.

 

Quite simply, people won't look for a different country to live in, because we make it too comfortable here for them, when we ought to have had firmer controls in the first place. I didn't say enforced repatriation by the way, but there are plenty of cunts in this country who we should kick out and if the legal system prevents it, then change the legal system. Do you know that police are guarding the house of one of those scumbags in Luton last week ? Why don't they guard a British man who protests against those who refuse to conform to the traditions of this country instead of banging him up ?

 

We do have a choice in the matter of teaching our kids to learn urdu, and other such bollocks, and building schools for these racists, and the simple answer is to stop doing it and again, if they don't like it, then tough shit, they can bugger off back to where they came from.

 

Your idealistic integrated society will never work, never. The only thing it will do is continue dividing the country.

 

And wtf is a photo of Jack Nicholson got to do with it ? What planet do you live on

 

Ha ha it's been working since the 60's.

 

Britain is by miles the most integrated country in Europe.

 

This new radical Islam is completely the fault of America and its idiocy and greed.

[Park Life 70]

You don't seem to understand the basic linkage between Home Office policy and policing with regard to particular scenarios. With this ignorance in mind you happily quoted the miners strike earlier. I really don't need to explain do I?

 

It's called institutional racism, and is the difference between one group being able to do this:

 

 

and the police stand by and let them, whilst most any other group would have been mown under a police horse charge for something similar.

 

 

To advocate that every situation should be treated exactly the same is just naivity on your behalf Fop. I don't think we're ever going to agree on that though so I'd just accept it as an impasse.

 

 

 

So you are basically saying that people should be policed DIFFERENTLY based on their beliefs/relgion/skin colour?

 

 

That puts you in some heady company.

 

 

You talk as if sensitive and progressive policing has just been invented. It's Home Office policy to to keep the gloves on and rightly so...You want blood on the streets I take it.

[Fop 1]

You don't seem to understand the basic linkage between Home Office policy and policing with regard to particular scenarios. With this ignorance in mind you happily quoted the miners strike earlier. I really don't need to explain do I?

 

It's called institutional racism, and is the difference between one group being able to do this:

 

 

and the police stand by and let them, whilst most any other group would have been mown under a police horse charge for something similar.

 

 

To advocate that every situation should be treated exactly the same is just naivity on your behalf Fop. I don't think we're ever going to agree on that though so I'd just accept it as an impasse.

 

 

 

So you are basically saying that people should be policed DIFFERENTLY based on their beliefs/relgion/skin colour?

 

 

That puts you in some heady company.

 

 

You talk as if sensitive and progressive policing has just been invented. It's Home Office policy to to keep the gloves on and rightly so...You want blood on the streets I take it.

 

Except it is NOT, only with certain groups which equals institutional racism, just as much as investigating a black persons death in a different way to a white persons death is institutional racism.

 

It's still institutional racism, even when you happen to agree with it.

[NJS 3986]

You talk as if sensitive and progressive policing has just been invented. It's Home Office policy to to keep the gloves on and rightly so...You want blood on the streets I take it.

 

Just for a laugh I'd love to see the guidelines used for Football fans to be applied to the public at large including Muslims - I think we'd actually see a revolution

[Renton 17856]

You don't seem to understand the basic linkage between Home Office policy and policing with regard to particular scenarios. With this ignorance in mind you happily quoted the miners strike earlier. I really don't need to explain do I?

 

It's called institutional racism, and is the difference between one group being able to do this:

 

 

and the police stand by and let them, whilst most any other group would have been mown under a police horse charge for something similar.

 

 

To advocate that every situation should be treated exactly the same is just naivity on your behalf Fop. I don't think we're ever going to agree on that though so I'd just accept it as an impasse.

 

 

 

So you are basically saying that people should be policed DIFFERENTLY based on their beliefs/relgion/skin colour?

 

 

That puts you in some heady company.

 

 

You talk as if sensitive and progressive policing has just been invented. It's Home Office policy to to keep the gloves on and rightly so...You want blood on the streets I take it.

 

Except it is NOT, only with certain groups which equals institutional racism, just as much as investigating a black persons death in a different way to a white persons death is institutional racism.

 

It's still institutional racism, even when you happen to agree with it.

 

 

To clarify Fop, do you believe the police are institutionally racist against white christian people?

[Park Life 70]

You don't seem to understand the basic linkage between Home Office policy and policing with regard to particular scenarios. With this ignorance in mind you happily quoted the miners strike earlier. I really don't need to explain do I?

 

It's called institutional racism, and is the difference between one group being able to do this:

 

 

and the police stand by and let them, whilst most any other group would have been mown under a police horse charge for something similar.

 

 

To advocate that every situation should be treated exactly the same is just naivity on your behalf Fop. I don't think we're ever going to agree on that though so I'd just accept it as an impasse.

 

 

 

So you are basically saying that people should be policed DIFFERENTLY based on their beliefs/relgion/skin colour?

 

 

That puts you in some heady company.

 

 

You talk as if sensitive and progressive policing has just been invented. It's Home Office policy to to keep the gloves on and rightly so...You want blood on the streets I take it.

 

Except it is NOT, only with certain groups which equals institutional racism, just as much as investigating a black persons death in a different way to a white persons death is institutional racism.

 

It's still institutional racism, even when you happen to agree with it.

 

 

How can a temporary strategy at a time of high tension and uncertainties be IR?

 

I really think you're mis-reading this Fop.

[LeazesMag 0]

the usual childish, moronic, comment, rather than admit that their successors have got nowhere near matching them. I asked you before, and I don't think you replied, what will you say in 15-20 years down the line and we still haven't matched the Halls and Shepherd ?

Will you then - like me - understand that they were a good board, [which is all I've ever said] and far better than you thought or said at the time ?

 

I might reply to the rest later.

 

Ha ha, I'm the childish one?

 

I did answer that question Leazes, you obviously didn't bother reading it. You're obsession with Shepherd and your need to point-score regarding him, again demonstrated by this post which is not even in the football forum, is as sad as it is utterly boring. The same old dross, repeated literally for years now, before you know it it will be decades. Count me out, don't bother replying, you've shown you're beyond help.

 

Shepherd ? You mean the Halls and Shepherd ? Don't you read ? I've never said Shepherd ran the club all on his own, because he didn't

 

You were wrong, smart lad, and you're wrong again. Must be killing you

 

As for point scoring, it isn't me who's denying I got it all wrong.......keep trying, or bow out gracefully if you prefer.

[Guest alex]

[manc-mag 1]

Barking tbh. There are a few proper obsessive types on here mind.

[Fop 1]

You don't seem to understand the basic linkage between Home Office policy and policing with regard to particular scenarios. With this ignorance in mind you happily quoted the miners strike earlier. I really don't need to explain do I?

 

It's called institutional racism, and is the difference between one group being able to do this:

 

 

and the police stand by and let them, whilst most any other group would have been mown under a police horse charge for something similar.

 

 

To advocate that every situation should be treated exactly the same is just naivity on your behalf Fop. I don't think we're ever going to agree on that though so I'd just accept it as an impasse.

 

 

 

So you are basically saying that people should be policed DIFFERENTLY based on their beliefs/relgion/skin colour?

 

 

That puts you in some heady company.

 

 

You talk as if sensitive and progressive policing has just been invented. It's Home Office policy to to keep the gloves on and rightly so...You want blood on the streets I take it.

 

Except it is NOT, only with certain groups which equals institutional racism, just as much as investigating a black persons death in a different way to a white persons death is institutional racism.

 

It's still institutional racism, even when you happen to agree with it.

 

 

How can a temporary strategy at a time of high tension and uncertainties be IR?

 

Because it is, how can it not be? Whether it happens once, twice, hundred times or from now till forever, it is still what it is - wrong.

 

I really think you're mis-reading this Fop.

 

 

So you'd agree with say the police allowing the BNP to throw fencing at them one day, but then the next day beating everyone half to death a Sikh march where a few people shoved a bit?

 

 

You can't pick and choose, equality is equality and institutional racism is institutional racism.

[Park Life 70]

You don't seem to understand the basic linkage between Home Office policy and policing with regard to particular scenarios. With this ignorance in mind you happily quoted the miners strike earlier. I really don't need to explain do I?

 

It's called institutional racism, and is the difference between one group being able to do this:

 

 

and the police stand by and let them, whilst most any other group would have been mown under a police horse charge for something similar.

 

 

To advocate that every situation should be treated exactly the same is just naivity on your behalf Fop. I don't think we're ever going to agree on that though so I'd just accept it as an impasse.

 

 

 

So you are basically saying that people should be policed DIFFERENTLY based on their beliefs/relgion/skin colour?

 

 

That puts you in some heady company.

 

 

You talk as if sensitive and progressive policing has just been invented. It's Home Office policy to to keep the gloves on and rightly so...You want blood on the streets I take it.

 

Except it is NOT, only with certain groups which equals institutional racism, just as much as investigating a black persons death in a different way to a white persons death is institutional racism.

 

It's still institutional racism, even when you happen to agree with it.

 

 

How can a temporary strategy at a time of high tension and uncertainties be IR?

 

Because it is, how can it not be? Whether it happens once, twice, hundred times or from now till forever, it is still what it is - wrong.

 

I really think you're mis-reading this Fop.

 

 

So you'd agree with say the police allowing the BNP to throw fencing at them one day, but then the next day beating everyone half to death a Sikh march where a few people shoved a bit?

 

 

You can't pick and choose, equality is equality and institutional racism is institutional racism.

\

\

 

BNP are too pussy to throw a party never mind fencing.

[Fop 1]

Well I doubt they'd be daft enough too, given that they'd probably get rubber bullets in return.

[Park Life 70]

Well I doubt they'd be daft enough too, given that they'd probably get rubber bullets in return.

 

 

The smell of Napalm down Hackney way?