You can call dying people you don't like 'prats' and posters you have issues with 'pr1cks' but god forbid you call people senile.

Don't concern yourself with hypocritical moral puritans throwing stones in fabricated greenhouses.

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Jun 2022 1.30pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

The problem with politics these days is that certain groups, ideologies and peoples have been allowed to believe they hold the moral high-ground in any given circumstance and therefore they have carte blanche to achieve their aims by whatever means necessary. This often includes pointing the finger and demonising certain groups.

I remain steadfast that this is the result of people's own insecurities and failings in life. When you blame current systems, ideologies or those more successful, Jewish, 'non-Aryans', any other group of peoples come to think of it, even a 'white patriarchy' for your own miserable existence/failings and adopt a hardline approach to overthrow these systems as you lay the blame solely at the feet of these external factors, then well, we've all seen where that leads.

It is my own opinion that things wrong in society today are caused by those who kicked up the biggest stink previously, and things that will be wrong in the future will be caused by those spitting dummies out of prams the most dramatically now.

I'd like to say that common sense, logic and reason are dying a slow and painful death, once again, in our society however I see it as a never ending loop quite frankly.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

I couldn’t agree more and it appears that the only argument being relied upon by ‘remainers’ is that the voters didn’t really know what they were voting for. This holds water for the section of the commmunity which didn’t understand the impact in either direction, however there were many voters on both sides who fell into that category so it is a poor argument.

The thing that concerns me about the outcome, is that rather than embrace the advantages of being unhindered by the Euro rules and regulations it appears the ‘remainers’ want the country to fail whilst only having the energy to try and turn 48% into a winning position by any underhand trick they can think of.

Too many in this country want everything handed to them on a plate. If they all rallied round and exhibited the same zeal towards a new way forward as they did the Jubilee celebrations then perhaps we could move on and be successful.

On the face of it the brexit vote forced the middle of the road, man on on the street, to make a stand against those things that they saw wrong with the erosion of our heritage and the globalisation of our futures. I am personally glad that the 52% got there just in time.

You’ve answered these questions many times yourself Stirling and they have been slowly infesting schools, colleges, local authorities and many other areas of authority for a long time.

Edited by Eaglecoops (07 Jun 2022 2.36pm)

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at there Stirling. My instinct is that you think my post is related to a continuum of posts on this thread whereas actually it's a separate ponderance loosely related to what Matov mentioned, well the one highlighted sentence.

If so, then what I was roundly getting at is that many peoples, over time, be they small or larger groups, consistently and messily redefine what their 'utopia' is and this is always synchronised with some sort of eulogised moral high-ground combined with the demonization of others, and the prolific hypocrisy from both sides. Brexit in this case.

I'd be happy to stand corrected in any case if you care/bother to explain further. My post is quite genuinely motivated by the fact I am 'told off' a lot, told 'you can't do/say that' and my long held belief that I am not crazy, the rest of the world is and I especially apply this to those who stick dogmatically and so immovably to ideologies beyond what I would deem logic.

My instinct is once again that my separate and perhaps slightly out of context post has been put in the wrong context, again, if you care to explain.

I certainly don't appreciate any attempt to be belittled or patronised.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

And you can call Aspergers sufferers a drain on society who mostly end up filling our prisons during a conversation about your own sisters Aspergers child, then when you're in the same position it's the sudden latch onto societal compassion you previously mock.

Or you can talk of gay people in your family, then by proxy insult them here as 'faggots' and 'degenerates' and pose concerns about such people being around children.

Yes, I said activists who told others not to get vaccinated, then ended up in hospital themselves were 'prats'. And? You've literally spent more time on here defending dubious far right types with swazkita covered neo nazis gfs than you have your own family. Politics over people, anti allegiance identity mad cowardice, where you decided against certain groups and that clouds it all. You are the exact same identity extreme as those you sneer at. Ironically I'm not in my politics, so it shows how far gone you are.

I don't mean to belittle you as I think what you are saying is genuine. If it relates to previous posts then It's a fair criticism that I might be out of context as I haven't read previous posts.

My point was that if we are going to distribute 'blame' onto groups for reason A or B then I think it's fair that those topics are specified. Because what I tend to see are a lot of catchment, whereas if you agree with a particular position the suggestion is it means you must be in particular specified ideological groups.....and...you know that must mean we're going to end up murdering Jews.

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Jun 2022 2.51pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

The difference between someone like BlueJay and me is that my issues are far more with liars and hypocrites than with people who hold views I don't agree with.

I'm not going to damn someone for saying something. If I'm interested I'll enquire why they think whatever it is....but we are all entitled to our views.

However, if someone wants to be self righteous and criticise someone for having an opinion they morally object to, then their own statements are going to come under that same attention.

By the way when he says that it was people in hospital he called 'prats', he's shading what what he wrote, it was dying people in hospital that he would disagree with over covid that he referred to as prats. Notice how he changes that truth to limit the impression. Because like his friend he's fine with manipulating the truth if it suits him. You will notice that if you are ever engaged in a contentious discussion with him once his veneer falls down.

I try not to do that. People can criticise me and if they don't like my opinions I'll accept it. However, what is true is important to me so those who bend and twist will receive commentary from time to time.

If you read BlueJay's post he seems to think that if I recognise that autism and other mental health issues are a 'drain on society' that this means that I have no compassion for those conditions or don't agree with supporting them.

That isn't actually true. It's his interpretation. There are several autistic children in my family very close to me. This guy takes a comment and infers meaning and intent for his own malicious purposes.

To him, apparently if an issue is close to you then it appears that must police how you discuss the issues, but I've never been a snowflake. If I'm a little too blunt for some people I accept that however, only a bad faith actor would use that to mislead others or indeed themselves.

I do have concerns about the 'gay disco' as I've taken to calling it. However, just to be clear to those who read BlueJay's comments and take them as an honest reflection of my views I don't view all gays as 'degenerates' and 'faggots' so his contention is once again inaccurate.

That issue deserves a far larger post that I've been lazy on writing but I will definitely post because this charge has been made several times now.

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Jun 2022 3.20pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I'm not a fan of Johnson myself but the issue you or anyone else have who opposes him....and as shown that's plenty of Tories as well....is that he's likeable.

So you're kind of stuck with the same issue the Tories had when Blair was around.....these leaders are kind of normie catnip and that's just how it is.

That said, the economy will always play a big factor in how any election goes.....So we could end up with woke Labour just by proxy of there not being anyone else to vote for.

Even though Labour would have gone just as hard on all the same economic decisions that led here.

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Jun 2022 3.31pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I read what the poster wrote and it was more literal than cryptic. I reckon imo it basically reads as an ie that if gender neutral want one toilet for all then they get one and it’s happened even though a tiny % are in this group. Like teaching nippers about sex at aged 5 and 6 because a small minority think it’s correct, it’s all about the loudest alongside our ‘leaders’ being actually affected by what the minority think. I mean ffs labour can’t even identify what a real woman is because it might get them bad press. Just my innocent take tbh.