Happy Face 29 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 They were saying it all over the news last night. The problem is they have literally no evidence, probably because there's none to be had! Apparently they have been using Blackberry Messenger but I'm not aware of the service. A few weeks ago they were saying all over the news that Al Qaeda had attacked Norway. They'll repeat any old gubbins to fill the hour out. What do you think is guiding all these louts around the police to vunerable locations? 'The power of the people mannnnn' You need a rubber bullet firing up your arse; hippies are of no use during a crisis. What's remotely hippy about wanting to clarify the truth of a claim? I don't know why you'd doubt that technology allows these people to communicate and concentrate attacks better than if they didn't have it. It seems a pretty axiomatic conclusion. But no, "Hey mannnn, I aint buyin' your crap mr. polititian mannn, power to the peoplee." Blackberry messenger isn't really "social media" though is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 14136 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 They were saying it all over the news last night. The problem is they have literally no evidence, probably because there's none to be had! Apparently they have been using Blackberry Messenger but I'm not aware of the service. A few weeks ago they were saying all over the news that Al Qaeda had attacked Norway. They'll repeat any old gubbins to fill the hour out. What do you think is guiding all these louts around the police to vunerable locations? 'The power of the people mannnnn' You need a rubber bullet firing up your arse; hippies are of no use during a crisis. What's remotely hippy about wanting to clarify the truth of a claim? I don't know why you'd doubt that technology allows these people to communicate and concentrate attacks better than if they didn't have it. It seems a pretty axiomatic conclusion. But no, "Hey mannnn, I aint buyin' your crap mr. polititian mannn, power to the peoplee." Blackberry messenger isn't really "social media" though is it? It's not as if the mainstream media are clued-in enough to know the difference though. I half expect the "information superhighway" to get blamed soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 6082 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Interviewing big jim the racist now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13915 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakehips 0 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 They were saying it all over the news last night. The problem is they have literally no evidence, probably because there's none to be had! Apparently they have been using Blackberry Messenger but I'm not aware of the service. A few weeks ago they were saying all over the news that Al Qaeda had attacked Norway. They'll repeat any old gubbins to fill the hour out. What do you think is guiding all these louts around the police to vunerable locations? 'The power of the people mannnnn' You need a rubber bullet firing up your arse; hippies are of no use during a crisis. What's remotely hippy about wanting to clarify the truth of a claim? I don't know why you'd doubt that technology allows these people to communicate and concentrate attacks better than if they didn't have it. It seems a pretty axiomatic conclusion. But no, "Hey mannnn, I aint buyin' your crap mr. polititian mannn, power to the peoplee." Blackberry messenger isn't really "social media" though is it? Reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 6082 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj 17 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 She's a right looker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 6082 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I'd like to think Babz there is being ironic but I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13915 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4002 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 1318: Lib Dem MP Stephen Williams blogs about the reasons for the violence: "Everyone wants to be rich and famous, without wanting to work hard to reach those otherwise acceptable ambitions. So I think the prime motivators behind the looting are greed and jealousy, rather than sorrow and anger. Basic human failings that have been around forever. Not contemporary political gripes but certainly contemporary social malaise." For 30 or 40 years now people have been told that the only measure of worth is wealth and material possessions so if you combine that with areas where it is harder to work hard and get out you're going to get opportunistic resentment. I don't know what the answer is - you could point to the 50s where people did swallow the "work hard and be useful" line more but there was less of a flaunting of riches then there is now which is another factor. Having said all that there is an underlying feeling that people willing to loot so readily are pretty much scum but even a leftie like me has always been aware of that problem when speaking up for deprived areas. I've always argued that you can be working class and "decent" being proud of my background but its becoming harder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. Absolutely spot on. Five facts about these riots The vast majority of the riots and ALL of the main areas involved are predominantly black FACT There is no aim apart from people looting and taking advantage of the situation by robbing and acting like cunts FACT 80% of the people involved are black FACT They will achieve nothing FACT They will blame lack of opportunities, while being in one of the world's great cities for opportunities, they'll blame lack of education and the government FACT There is no reason they should be doing this FACT ...lastly it is wrong in the constraints of political correctness in 2011 to mention the utter majority of these vile scum are not white FACT Someone answer me this question WHY can't we debate my last point, I'm not on about on here, but WHY can't it even be mentioned someone give me an intelligent reasoned answer as to why questions can not be asked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 4002 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. There's two sides to it imo - its "coincidence" that a lot of poor and rough inner city areas are predominately black but I've said before there are problems in black culture that should be allowed to be stated and discussed. Of course problems such as being gangster wanabees has spread to other Ethnic groups including Asians and Whites in London and elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. This is why I'm surprised you banned Geordio Armani for racism and abuse. He was clearly guilty of both, but at least he was open about it. I think the mackem spammers are more annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. Absolutely spot on. Five facts about these riots The vast majority of the riots and ALL of the main areas involved are predominantly black FACT There is no aim apart from people looting and taking advantage of the situation by robbing and acting like cunts FACT 80% of the people involved are black FACT They will achieve nothing FACT They will blame lack of opportunities, while being in one of the world's great cities for opportunities, they'll blame lack of education and the government FACT There is no reason they should be doing this FACT ...lastly it is wrong in the constraints of political correctness in 2011 to mention the utter majority of these vile scum are not white FACT Someone answer me this question WHY can't we debate my last point, I'm not on about on here, but WHY can't it even be mentioned someone give me an intelligent reasoned answer as to why questions can not be asked. Love the way you pulled actual figures out of the air and called them facts. 95% of people involved are male. FACT. Why aren't you chomping at the bit to point out that FACT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13915 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. This is why I'm surprised you banned Geordio Armani for racism and abuse. He was clearly guilty of both, but at least he was open about it. I think the mackem spammers are more annoying. Again missing the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I don't know what the answer is - you could point to the 50s where people did swallow the "work hard and be useful" line more but there was less of a flaunting of riches then there is now which is another factor. As we go further back through history class distinctions were more pronounced. This has changed due to technological advances: cheap clothing, televisions, internet, yada yada. The working class in the 50s and before had it tougher than this lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. Absolutely spot on. Five facts about these riots The vast majority of the riots and ALL of the main areas involved are predominantly black FACT There is no aim apart from people looting and taking advantage of the situation by robbing and acting like cunts FACT 80% of the people involved are black FACT They will achieve nothing FACT They will blame lack of opportunities, while being in one of the world's great cities for opportunities, they'll blame lack of education and the government FACT There is no reason they should be doing this FACT ...lastly it is wrong in the constraints of political correctness in 2011 to mention the utter majority of these vile scum are not white FACT Someone answer me this question WHY can't we debate my last point, I'm not on about on here, but WHY can't it even be mentioned someone give me an intelligent reasoned answer as to why questions can not be asked. Love the way you pulled actual figures out of the air and called them facts. 95% of people involved are male. FACT. Why aren't you chomping at the bit to point out that FACT? Well done for avoiding my question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. This is why I'm surprised you banned Geordio Armani for racism and abuse. He was clearly guilty of both, but at least he was open about it. I think the mackem spammers are more annoying. Again missing the point. Yeah sorry, I forgot you banned him for calling you Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Dynamite 6082 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. Absolutely spot on. Five facts about these riots The vast majority of the riots and ALL of the main areas involved are predominantly black FACT There is no aim apart from people looting and taking advantage of the situation by robbing and acting like cunts FACT 80% of the people involved are black FACT They will achieve nothing FACT They will blame lack of opportunities, while being in one of the world's great cities for opportunities, they'll blame lack of education and the government FACT There is no reason they should be doing this FACT ...lastly it is wrong in the constraints of political correctness in 2011 to mention the utter majority of these vile scum are not white FACT Someone answer me this question WHY can't we debate my last point, I'm not on about on here, but WHY can't it even be mentioned someone give me an intelligent reasoned answer as to why questions can not be asked. Love the way you pulled actual figures out of the air and called them facts. 95% of people involved are male. FACT. Why aren't you chomping at the bit to point out that FACT? That's 7 facts btw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13915 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It may be worth stating that I personally didn't ban him - a group of admins and mods banned him. One admin doesn't ban a poster. Anyway I digress... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveTheBobby 1 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. This is why I'm surprised you banned Geordio Armani for racism and abuse. He was clearly guilty of both, but at least he was open about it. I think the mackem spammers are more annoying. Exactly man - they give liberalism a bad name . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 14897 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It's impossible that he could be telling the truth. Not in this PC society... we've all seen for ourselves that the white folk have been involved too. Can't blame kay Burley for pulling him up on it. And he's far too little to be called big jim anyway It's the thought process I'm criticising. It's not about race in the orthodox sense but that a man can't report a factual event without being called a racist. People are thinking with very closed minds and it's a trend that you see constantly these days. People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc. The thing is its just lazy to blame it on ethnic minorities....where were all the rampaging gangs of negroes when the locals went mad for a couple of nights on the Meadowell 20 years ago?... Blackbird Leys in Oxford went up at the same time and it (at the time) was overwhelmingly white British too. When riots occur,its those on the lowest rung of society's ladder who are usually involved, it just so happens that in most large cities the world over those people are almost always an ethnic minority. I'll let others put forward ideas for why that may be the case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac-Toon 1 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 'A riot is the language of the unheard' - Martin Luther King, or imo, 'A riot is the language of the uneducated'. Duck eggs, to a man. From an address given in Birmingham, Ala. Dec. 31, 1963 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 It may be worth stating that I personally didn't ban him - a group of admins and mods banned him. One admin doesn't ban a poster. Anyway I digress... I wasn't trying to say GA was victim of this: "People literally won't allow themselves to think without labelling something ''racist'' or ''offensive to'' etc etc." I just think that given the type of stuff that is tolerated on here, Daffyd and Nick for instance, I'm surprised that racism like GA displayed would result in a ban. Racism is fundamentally stupid and worthy of derision, but it's something that can lead to a more interesting debate than say... Tom, do you think that Alan Shearer was putting his full effort in during the last 3 months of Gullitt's management, that is to say, perhaps he was annoyed because he didn't like Gullitt personally and this reflected in his performances on the pitch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now