The subheadline on that picture says “the left and islamists” - and yet the picture as you say seems to not show that. At least one is seemingly from a far right riot. News to me that islamists use that sign. Will have to take your word that this is indeed where both pics are from.
Agreed. I can’t stand Owen Jones and Novara. They are horrendous. They were actively trying to sandbag the Labour campaign which could have resulted in a continuation of the Tory mess that any one even slightly on the left should have wanted to put a stop to regardless of who was coming in as long a they were even one step left of the last lot. As you say - they are grifters and benefit far more from stoking fury and whinging in opposition. Videos about Tory outrages get far more clicks on lefty sites I actually watched some right wing sites pre election because when they were laying into the government. It made me realise that this time really would be the end for them. But since Labour have come in they have just gone delulu and gone full conspiracy theorist constantly babbling about WEF , psyops, stage managed riots and trying to make out that it’s Labour’s fault despite them being in for a month and the previous government in for 14 years It’s properly bananas. It’s bad enough occasionally reading that sort of conspiraloon narrative on here from time to time. Listening to people where you can actually hear from the tone of their voice that they take it seriously is a step too far for me at the moment
Yes it was news to me. I didn’t spend any real time looking at pictures from any of the protests related to Israel and Gaza to look for what signs people were making. I was aware that there were anti-Semitic elements in the pro-Palestine ones because of course they would be. I had no idea there were Islamists who went as far as using the fascist salute since the most prominent users of that sign in history would have very little time for them either (and that’s being euphemistic)
Owen Jones in particular should be ignored. He was anti-EU until it suddenly got painted as a "right wing" thing at which point he became vehemently pro EU. He then criticised Corbyn for flip flopping on the EU debate ignoring his own flip flopping. Then suddenly was fully pro Corbyn when he saw the membership moving that way. Then when he thought Corbyn would be ousted by the "right" of the Labour party he went anti-Corbyn again. The guy is a go-to for all news outlets for some reason in the same way they seem to love mouthy right wingers but then the mainstream TV media has turned into the soundbite social media format themselves these days more interested in reactions to the past hour's posts than any actual in depth news coverage.
Its craxy tbh that right wingers will one day be banging on about "Our grandparents fought to maintain your freedom" and then the next day use gestures of the very people their grandparents fought and that "pro gaza" folks will hold up placards labelling Israel as the new Nazis but then use nazi symbols and gestures because they are quite obviously offensive to Jewish people! Shocking stuff really. But both need dealing with equally. It is pretty important for there to be a perception to people that they are treated fairly and not to pander to political narratives pretending that one side's identical actions are somehow "different." We have had years of politicians (Yvette balls is one of the worst) backed by the media thinking they can ignore what the public mood is and just repackage the swame agenda with different messaging. People seem to have forgotten how hard Yvette Balls stance was on refugees / asylum seekers. Another that changes mind with the wind. professional politician though. Always with a serious tone as if she really cares.......whichever way she is facing on that day. And the balance? I focus on the left wingers becasue the left is supposed to care about the people. the Demos (when it suits) while the Tories are supposed to be hard nosed big heads that think they know better, thus it is normally the left that let slip their hatred of people on occasion while the Tories you can pretty much take that for granted anyway.
Assuming you mean Yvette Cooper it is important to note that she has had basically no say of influence for anything other than the last month of the last 14 years. She’s stood up and said various things when required as opposite to the Home Secretary. But she hasn’t been able to do or say anything. I obviously agree with the point on anyone using the salute. I’m baffled by both but speaking on what I know more closely I don’t understand why anyone white British person who proclaimed a strong attachment to our island history would even use the salute of the foe we played a key part in vanquishing in arguably our greatest ever national triumph. My only possible guess (although I’m certain it doesn’t go this deep) is that fighting in that war was the death of our empire and position on the world stage. But now seems like a time to bring up something I was wondering based on you going in hard over Cooper rather than any of the actual Home Secretaries who have also ignored the majority of the public will (which they have) - why is it that it seems like you have only started posting on this thread with a gusto since the Labour victory? And pretty much primarily to stick the boot into them and state the “all politicians are the same” lines. Unless it’s a profile name change. Because most of the things you are complaining at are very much the fault of the previous government who had 14 years to do something about them. But I don’t really recognise your profile as one who has posted much about that over the last few years and I don’t think in the build up to the election either. I’d like to think I might have clocked it as you are one of the few with views that are more what most would consider “on the right”. But at least expressed with some degree of nuance and an indication that they are your own and not parroted from social media. It’s just that there is a sudden massive flurry of posts mostly going in two footed on a new government that was elected last month and is getting its feet under the table. It’s intriguing but I appreciate I have no right to an answer or indeed to question how anyone posts. There was almost a point where I wondered if there was an alternative account situation going on but quickly dismissed it It’s almost as if these riots were planned in the event of a Labour victory to give people and excuse to harshly criticise them for both how they handle them (more valid) and for “not listening to the people” and helping create the conditions for them to start (complete invalid)
I honestly can't stand it and find it incredibly grim. Whenever I eat it I feel clammy instantly and like my life has been considerably shortened. I wish junk food was my vice though. It'd be a lot cheaper and less mentally damaging than narcotics.
And this is, in essence, the problem. You, archers, loading comment on these rioters based on only what the media tell you. You say that the two tier policing system is fabricated despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary if you chose to investigate for longer than 2 seconds of watching TV: The protestors absolutely have a point. But many on the left are wilfully ignorant
I honestly don’t think there has ever been a more stupid group in history than queers for Palestine. The lack of awareness is hysterical
Far left group “hope not hate”’s leader admits the “100 far right riots” were a hoax in order to create a political narrative.
My bad. Mark Rowley https://news.sky.com/story/amp/met-...nights-successful-policing-operation-13192996
Gaslighting prick “there was some minor trouble which was anti social behaviour” Reality: Croydon was smashed up , police officers injured If that exact same event in Croydon was people with St George’s or Union flags it would be front page news saying “EDL thugs destroy London”
Question for you Os. Do you ever go out of the house and meet real people, or does all your information about the world come from dubious online sources?
In case anyone on here is not aware - the sentencing guidelines for crimes is different depending on the crime. Being involved in riots is up to 10 years (and many are clamouring for the harsher end that are not being handed out). So some of these people are potentially getting off leniently Someone being sentenced to less time for a completely different crime that has nothing to do with rioting is NOT evidence of a “two tier justice system” for anything other that how sentences are handed out and for what crime. Now people can raise separate concerns as to whether the sentences for common assault should be higher to align with the sentences for riots or whether the sentencing for being at riots should be lower and brought down to align with common assault. That is fine What you (or the royal “you” if the information has been lifted from elsewhere - which I expect it has) can’t do is trawl through the internet and look for two very different crimes and fine one where a white person was given more prison time and one where a brown person was given less (despite being different crimes - i really must stress this point again for the hard of thinking out there) and then howl about two tier policing. I’m going to call that what it is - is racist. It’s just racist. Because it’s notable who was picked as an example on the more lenient side when there are likely hundreds of stories of other people of all races given lenient sentences for a whole variety of crimes. It’s just racism. And a specific kind. If wild an unequal comparisons are going to be used then why not pick the horrible case of the man who stabbed people including some students in (I think Nottingham) and was given a pathetic sentence I think due to citing mental health? Because he wasn’t the right skin tone to fit this racist narrative being peddled right now over two tier policing (pretty sure he was black but the targets at the moment are specifically Muslims - due to very specific racism) For clarification - I am saying that some of the things being said and posted are most definitely racist. Not that anyone posting them are. This two tier policing ignores how much higher stop and search rates are in certain parts of the country for non white people. I expect a lot of it stems from the appalling grooming gang incidents where local police were seen as too scared to be accused of racist for investigating. But right now the “two tier” thing has been dialled down to differences in sentencing it seems - which to me is different to “not properly investigating accusations”. It’s about once people have actually been caught doing something with evidence and arrested.
The issue doesn’t even need to be that all your information comes from dubious online sources even when it does. It’s when it all comes from online sources other than, like you said, going outside and meeting and talking to people. For example if someone tried to share the idea that there is two tier policing in favour of non-white people with a non-white person I expect they would get some interesting and eye opening responses. Whether it is brown people post 9-11 or black people in London in general.
Two brilliant posts Trust me Greg, ignore is such a good thing. Makes the thread a bit weird, but your overall happiness for the day is better. It is not ignoring 'WHAT IS REALLY HAPPENING, WAKE UP YOU LEFTIES!!!!" (in caps as I imagine this is how certain people reading this thread will say it), it is just if I wanted to listen to all this bullshit, I would read the Daily Mail and follow Tate & Robinson on social media. I don't. I come here for 90% Saints debate and maybe 10% off topic. Not 10% off topic with such utter garbage and yes, outright racism hidden behind the 'I'm not a racist, but this has to stop. How dare non whites come into the country and earn a living' Get over it, the country isn't a white elite. Colour of your skin makes not one bit of difference to morals and the way you act. Yes, I can find examples of hideous brown people, but I can find the same amount of hideous white people. Some people are just bad. It is not about 'taking our country back' or 'protecting our kids'. It is about finding a scapegoat that is easily identifiable. The Nazis did it in the 1930s. They used the narrative to pick on a prosperous group of people that looked and acted different, so were easily identifiable.
Thank you. And I know “ignore” is a good thing. I just don’t always have the discipline to not click it off to try and make sense of some of the threads. And envy the people who can tune it out without even needing the button!
