This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
hedgehog50  Croydon 27 Jan 17 1.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Sedlescombe
On the out of context point - at least the one I was referring to - the words that were attributed to Grant were correct but taking the words out before the ones quoted in the press change the meaning and that was the intention of the journalist so you cant completely dismiss "the context defence" but every situation is different and we are all culpable for giving a free pass to the people we agree with and all over situations where people we don't like say something we object to. I gave the full quote of what Grant said: Do you think using the words "The youths around here believe" justifies his tacit support of a policeman being hacked to death and attempts being made to severe and put his head on a pole? How is what he said being put out of context? He was commenting on a mob rioting and killing - what other context could he have meant?
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 27 Jan 17 1.30pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
I gave the full quote of what Grant said: Do you think using the words "The youths around here believe" justifies his tacit support of a policeman being hacked to death and attempts being made to severe and put his head on a pole? How is what he said being put out of context? He was commenting on a mob rioting and killing - what other context could he have meant? How the bloody hell can you take that quote and say he tacitly supported murder?
|
|
  Hrolf The Ganger 27 Jan 17 1.34pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by legaleagle
I love the way those on the right who have immigrant-related phobias suggest their extremities are middle ground common sense (not a new conceit in this context I'm afraid)...more like uncommon lack of sense perhaps! Its a view of the centre in the same way that a goalkeeper stands at the centre rather than at an extremity of the pitch Though there are times of course when the 'common sense' of the extreme right has indeed become mainstream thought in a country or on a continent..as we know to our cost during the last century Your rhetoric on this subject is always the same and totally misses the practical issues. You can't debate with the closed minded.
|
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 27 Jan 17 1.36pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
How the bloody hell can you take that quote and say he tacitly supported murder? Because he did not condemn the murder or criticise the rioters in any way - he revelled in the police getting a "bloody good hiding".
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Mr_Gristle In the land of Whelk Eaters 27 Jan 17 1.49pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
Your rhetoric on this subject is always the same and totally misses the practical issues. You can't debate with the closed minded. A monumental wind-up, surely? I'm sure you're not that much of a hypocrite, Hrolf.
Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune) |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 27 Jan 17 2.10pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mr_Gristle
A monumental wind-up, surely? I'm sure you're not that much of a hypocrite, Hrolf. A predictable retort but I am always open to evidence that might change my mind. Sadly, I see no counter argument that stands up to scrutiny. What I do see is a lot of accusatory innuendo.
|
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 27 Jan 17 2.19pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Because he did not condemn the murder or criticise the rioters in any way - he revelled in the police getting a "bloody good hiding". You know this how? Edited by nickgusset (27 Jan 2017 2.22pm)
|
|
| OknotOK Cockfosters, London 27 Jan 17 2.32pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
A predictable retort but I am always open to evidence that might change my mind. Sadly, I see no counter argument that stands up to scrutiny. What I do see is a lot of accusatory innuendo. That was a pretty predictable retort as well. If you genuinely can't see that you are pretty clearly guilty of exactly what you're accusing legaleagle of then there isn't much point in continuing. And yes it isn't one-sided, there are people on the "other side" who take similar stances.
"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show |
|
| OknotOK Cockfosters, London 27 Jan 17 2.34pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Because he did not condemn the murder or criticise the rioters in any way - he revelled in the police getting a "bloody good hiding". He did apologise for distress to the family and stated it was being taken out of context and all he was doing was explaining the sentiment on the estate - not glorifying in the violence. And he was well respected and enjoyed the support of much of the local police. But don't let that get in the way. He probably shouldn't have said it - and certainly shouldn't have said it the way he did. But he didn't revel in the violence. To say he did is bollocks.
"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 27 Jan 17 3.05pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
That was a pretty predictable retort as well. If you genuinely can't see that you are pretty clearly guilty of exactly what you're accusing legaleagle of then there isn't much point in continuing. And yes it isn't one-sided, there are people on the "other side" who take similar stances. OK. I think the main difference in positions is that I hold my view based on reason, albeit debatable, where as Legal, for example, thinks it's all some sort of honky plot to banish all non "Anglo Saxons".In that way, he only wishes to shut down any reasonable debate rather than make sensible counter arguments.
|
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 27 Jan 17 3.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
He did apologise for distress to the family and stated it was being taken out of context and all he was doing was explaining the sentiment on the estate - not glorifying in the violence. And he was well respected and enjoyed the support of much of the local police. But don't let that get in the way. He probably shouldn't have said it - and certainly shouldn't have said it the way he did. But he didn't revel in the violence. To say he did is bollocks. He apologised to the Blakelock family did he? [I don't doubt you, but have to ask for a source of course as this is standard on the forum at the moment. Also have to debate what the context was of him apologising.] In any event, I'm sure the Blakelocks felt so much better because an agitator and past member of the Workers Revolutionary Party, who did not condemn the rioting apologised for something or the other. "The sentiment of the estate", what you mean the murderous blood-lust and criminality?
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 27 Jan 17 4.28pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
He apologised to the Blakelock family did he? [I don't doubt you, but have to ask for a source of course as this is standard on the forum at the moment. Also have to debate what the context was of him apologising.] In any event, I'm sure the Blakelocks felt so much better because an agitator and past member of the Workers Revolutionary Party, who did not condemn the rioting apologised for something or the other. "The sentiment of the estate", what you mean the murderous blood-lust and criminality? Mere conjecture.
|
|
| OknotOK Cockfosters, London 27 Jan 17 4.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
He apologised to the Blakelock family did he? [I don't doubt you, but have to ask for a source of course as this is standard on the forum at the moment. Also have to debate what the context was of him apologising.] In any event, I'm sure the Blakelocks felt so much better because an agitator and past member of the Workers Revolutionary Party, who did not condemn the rioting apologised for something or the other. "The sentiment of the estate", what you mean the murderous blood-lust and criminality? My father-in-law knew Bernie Grant well so I have second half stories for some of it. For the apology, unfortunately I can't find much except from the BBC obit This also makes reference to praise from the police ("caring, committed, hard-working, and effective" ), but I'm sure you'll dismiss it anyway. I didn't say anything about what the "sentiment of the estate" was or meant. He did. When explaining the context that was wildy and deliberately misrepresented by the tabloids at the time. The question of whether he was a racist is probably a more complicated one (and an argument could reasonably be made either way I suspect, although I know which side I would end up on). But the question of whether he revelled in the violence is a simple one - you are wrong full stop. Edited by OknotOK (27 Jan 2017 4.38pm)
"It's almost like a moral decision. Except not really cos noone is going to find out," Jez, Peep Show |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 27 Jan 17 5.03pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
My father-in-law knew Bernie Grant well so I have second half stories for some of it. For the apology, unfortunately I can't find much except from the BBC obit This also makes reference to praise from the police ("caring, committed, hard-working, and effective" ), but I'm sure you'll dismiss it anyway. I didn't say anything about what the "sentiment of the estate" was or meant. He did. When explaining the context that was wildy and deliberately misrepresented by the tabloids at the time. The question of whether he was a racist is probably a more complicated one (and an argument could reasonably be made either way I suspect, although I know which side I would end up on). But the question of whether he revelled in the violence is a simple one - you are wrong full stop. Edited by OknotOK (27 Jan 2017 4.38pm) He opposed holding a by-election in Vauxhall in 1989 because Labour fielded a white candidate. [source the BBC] Edited by hedgehog50 (27 Jan 2017 5.04pm)
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 27 Jan 17 5.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by OknotOK
My father-in-law knew Bernie Grant well so I have second half stories for some of it. For the apology, unfortunately I can't find much except from the BBC obit This also makes reference to praise from the police ("caring, committed, hard-working, and effective" ), but I'm sure you'll dismiss it anyway. I didn't say anything about what the "sentiment of the estate" was or meant. He did. When explaining the context that was wildy and deliberately misrepresented by the tabloids at the time. The question of whether he was a racist is probably a more complicated one (and an argument could reasonably be made either way I suspect, although I know which side I would end up on). But the question of whether he revelled in the violence is a simple one - you are wrong full stop. Edited by OknotOK (27 Jan 2017 4.38pm) Why didn't he condemn the violence?
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| matt_himself Matataland 27 Jan 17 5.58pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Why didn't he condemn the violence? I do have a modicum of sympathy with Bernie Grant on this issue. However, we must remember the death of PC Blakelock was unforgivable. The issue is that being black, and particularly young and black, in London in the 1970's was very different to today. It is no wonder that pressure built up from lack of opportunity and there was significant institutional racism at the time. It would have been wrong of Bernie not to acknowledge this, given that he was the MP for these constituents at the time. His barking mad politics are a different matter.
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 27 Jan 17 6.16pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by matt_himself
I do have a modicum of sympathy with Bernie Grant on this issue. However, we must remember the death of PC Blakelock was unforgivable. The issue is that being black, and particularly young and black, in London in the 1970's was very different to today. It is no wonder that pressure built up from lack of opportunity and there was significant institutional racism at the time. It would have been wrong of Bernie not to acknowledge this, given that he was the MP for these constituents at the time. His barking mad politics are a different matter.
|
|
Kermit8  Hevon 27 Jan 17 7.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
The day before the riot there was the trigger when the police had aggressively invaded Cynthia Jarrett's flat and she was alone and died in the commotion then later Bernie set out his stall by slamming The Met and their way of doing things. He was never going to condemn the riot but I would hope he condemned the murder and if he didn't then that was plainly contemptible.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 27 Jan 17 8.23pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Kermit8
The day before the riot there was the trigger when the police had aggressively invaded Cynthia Jarrett's flat and she was alone and died in the commotion then later Bernie set out his stall by slamming The Met and their way of doing things. He was never going to condemn the riot but I would hope he condemned the murder and if he didn't then that was plainly contemptible. As a politician he should have. He could stand up for black rights and condemn police procedure without seeming to support rioting. This is where I lose sympathy. Injustice happens every day but people don't riot over it.
|
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 27 Jan 17 9.25pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
As a politician he should have. He could stand up for black rights and condemn police procedure without seeming to support rioting. This is where I lose sympathy. Injustice happens every day but people don't riot over it. They do in the end if it keeps happening to the same group of people.
|
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.