You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Grenfell bonfire
December 14 2018 7.05pm

Grenfell bonfire

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 9 of 11 < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

 

View Painter's Profile Painter Flag Croydon 07 Nov 18 1.29pm Send a Private Message to Painter Add Painter as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

So you think violence is the answer? Or maybe we should just start locking people up for looking at you in a funny way.

Wow, you people really are the new fascists.

I don’t think he thinks violence is the answer.

He just doesn’t understand the difference between freedom of speech and abusive behaviour.

Also doubt he is a fascist, wouldn’t know how too.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View elgrande's Profile elgrande Flag bedford 07 Nov 18 1.39pm Send a Private Message to elgrande Add elgrande as a friend

I went to see Jimmy Carr earlier this year.....f*** me you think that cardboard was offensive....nothing was sacred,he slaughters e everything.

 


always a Norwood boy, where ever I live.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 07 Nov 18 1.42pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Pussay Patrol

So we should waste energy?

Those horrible Europeans making us save energy and money!

Typical typical lefty
Cherry picking bits like normal.
Read the bloody post how i wrote it.
First i dont think the dead really give a s*** about a cardboard building being burnt.
2nd the enquiry will highlight not just the council and government at fault.
3rd people like YOU wont want the truth anyway and lastly it wasnt a cosmetic choice
Ffs you and yours just dont get irony do you.
Go and live in america cos they struggle as well.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 07 Nov 18 1.44pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by DanH

So if someone insulted you/your wife/your kids to your face would you just shrug it off and say 'yeah fair play mate, freedom of speech'?

It takes a bigger man to walk away and in the main yes i would.
Antifa do it the other way which is clearly where you are at.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View DanH's Profile DanH Flag SW2 07 Nov 18 1.52pm Send a Private Message to DanH Add DanH as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays


I certainly wouldn't be calling the police for insults no.

Very few from where I'm from would have neither.....Wow, we truly see the difference here.

Anything else you want the state knocking on doors about? What's next, nasty rumours? 'He said/She said' gossip perhaps?

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Nov 2018 12.54pm)

You've missed the point (imagine my shock etc.)

I meant that words have consequences, whether people like it or not. People can say what they want, but not without expecting a reaction.

(And no Hrolf, I was not advocating violence. I wouldn't harm a fly. Quite a feat to miss a point further than the main lad here)

 


Tw@tter:

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Pussay Patrol's Profile Pussay Patrol Flag 07 Nov 18 1.56pm Send a Private Message to Pussay Patrol Add Pussay Patrol as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

Typical typical lefty
Cherry picking bits like normal.
Read the bloody post how i wrote it.
First i dont think the dead really give a s*** about a cardboard building being burnt.
2nd the enquiry will highlight not just the council and government at fault.
3rd people like YOU wont want the truth anyway and lastly it wasnt a cosmetic choice
Ffs you and yours just dont get irony do you.
Go and live in america cos they struggle as well.

Now, for clarity, your inference was that the cladding was erected because of EU policy about energy efficiency? So are you of the belief that were we not in the EU, we wouldn't have done it? I'd have thought being energy efficient and Investing in housing stock was just common sense. Blaming the EU because we ballsed it up is a little disingenuous

 


Why did Tong Po think running at Kurt with a flame would make any difference?

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 07 Nov 18 2.01pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by DanH

You've missed the point (imagine my shock etc.)

I meant that words have consequences, whether people like it or not. People can say what they want, but not without expecting a reaction.

(And no Hrolf, I was not advocating violence. I wouldn't harm a fly. Quite a feat to miss a point further than the main lad here)

A reaction? So a verbal attack should be met with a verbal rebuff, not having your house burnt down.

If there must be responsibility with speech then there must be equal responsibility with the response.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag Wisbech, England 07 Nov 18 2.02pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by DanH

You've missed the point (imagine my shock etc.)

I meant that words have consequences, whether people like it or not. People can say what they want, but not without expecting a reaction.

(And no Hrolf, I was not advocating violence. I wouldn't harm a fly. Quite a feat to miss a point further than the main lad here)


I've missed nothing, I simply answered the rather silly question.

As for consequences, I have no issues with 'reactions'.

'Reactions' have been what we have always had.

It's only recently that the state has changed the law and enabled state involvement over 'opinion'. You appear to support them.

I have massive issues with state involvement over opinions. Indeed many of these views were commonplace and are commonplace.....We are talking outright suppression.

Never mind, when the cycle changes and it's people like yourself who find themselves focused upon you'll no doubt see it differently. I'll still support your freedom of speech.....but I'll remember your hypocrisy.

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Nov 2018 2.04pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View SW19 CPFC's Profile SW19 CPFC Flag Addiscombe 07 Nov 18 2.25pm Send a Private Message to SW19 CPFC Add SW19 CPFC as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I agree......We are living in a regressive time.

We have the dominant virtue signalling groups in power in society on both the left and right who are literally implementing moral fagging.

Apparently people want to legally punish arseholes.....you aren't allowed to offend or be an idiot without PC Plod banging at your door.

For those who believe in traditional freedom of speech these are not good times.

This is a bit sensationalist.

Also freedom of speech is still governed according to the law and has always had boundaries. This is not a new thing. How they're enforced is the problem, I'd agree there. But if you're suggesting Free Speech = Say anything you like without repercussion = traditional free speech then as you know you're wrong according to the law. But I suppose it doesn't suit the anti-establishment narrative/moany sensationalist thought police orwellian dross. When google gets embedded into our brains sometime this century then you might have a point.

Where I agree is what was done is in no way illegal. Anyone with a rational brain and a basic grasp of the law knows that. Ignorant, feckless and disgusting, yes. Contrary to your belief, you are most certainly able to offend and be an idiot without being investigated. Pretty much everyone on this forum does it all the time.

Do it in public with witnesses, or share something offensive on social media though? Then you're the real idiot.

What is illegal is the sharing of the material over social media. The sharing of names in the papers is not great either, but once it's in the public domain... Karma is a bitch.

If the racist element is either present or proven then they are definitely in the s***. Some of the soundbites coming out from their relatives do make me laugh. Much like the old 'but one of my friends is black' trope. 'He's such a good boy'. Everyones a w***er in private.

Purely circumstantial but talking about 'the ninja is going to get it in a minute' doesn't help matters. You're free to be as idiotic and racist as you like in private, so long as you're with likeminded people and you don't share s*** on the internet, or do it in public in a way that will offend others.

One enlightening fact is that under section 4A of the public order act, if there are two or more people witness to the event then it is prosecutable under the 'displaying a visual representation which is insulting', even if it's in your own home. However they're unlikely to complain about each other. Or maybe they will. That would be amazing.

Will be interesting to follow this as a test case for some of the enshrined views by people on this forum on both 'sides' – my assumption is that they will get off with a fine or warning.

The person that shared the video may get in more trouble with the law, and probably with their group as it's the only reason they're being exposed. The person who revealed their actual face rather than their public face with the 'ninja' comment could also be in a bit of s***.

Other than that, on current evidence I can't see who else would get slammed. If they all get jailed without trial or evidence I'll craft my own special tin hat made from the very finest bacofoil.

And they might have to move out of Norwood. Probably for the best.

 


said the rabid giraffe whilst brandishing his throbbing member of reason, and twas ever thus.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag Wisbech, England 07 Nov 18 2.39pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

I'm not a free speech absolutist.....I have some respect for that position but I see the sense in not shouting 'bomb' on a packed tube train.

We have never had free speech absolutism in this country.

However, for most of our modern history we have quite rightly set the bar for impedance on speech as low as possible.

Incitement to violence, libel and limited obscenity........that is what I mean by 'traditional' freedom of speech. This is about what the state should be involving itself with.

Offence....being nasty..the subjectivity of 'feelings'....that has f*** all to do with the state and we are embarked on a path made by fools.

Edited by Stirlingsays (07 Nov 2018 2.42pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View DanH's Profile DanH Flag SW2 07 Nov 18 3.02pm Send a Private Message to DanH Add DanH as a friend

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

This is a bit sensationalist.

Also freedom of speech is still governed according to the law and has always had boundaries. This is not a new thing. How they're enforced is the problem, I'd agree there. But if you're suggesting Free Speech = Say anything you like without repercussion = traditional free speech then as you know you're wrong according to the law. But I suppose it doesn't suit the anti-establishment narrative/moany sensationalist thought police orwellian dross. When google gets embedded into our brains sometime this century then you might have a point.

Where I agree is what was done is in no way illegal. Anyone with a rational brain and a basic grasp of the law knows that. Ignorant, feckless and disgusting, yes. Contrary to your belief, you are most certainly able to offend and be an idiot without being investigated. Pretty much everyone on this forum does it all the time.

Do it in public with witnesses, or share something offensive on social media though? Then you're the real idiot.

What is illegal is the sharing of the material over social media. The sharing of names in the papers is not great either, but once it's in the public domain... Karma is a bitch.

If the racist element is either present or proven then they are definitely in the s***. Some of the soundbites coming out from their relatives do make me laugh. Much like the old 'but one of my friends is black' trope. 'He's such a good boy'. Everyones a w***er in private.

Purely circumstantial but talking about 'the ninja is going to get it in a minute' doesn't help matters. You're free to be as idiotic and racist as you like in private, so long as you're with likeminded people and you don't share s*** on the internet, or do it in public in a way that will offend others.

One enlightening fact is that under section 4A of the public order act, if there are two or more people witness to the event then it is prosecutable under the 'displaying a visual representation which is insulting', even if it's in your own home. However they're unlikely to complain about each other. Or maybe they will. That would be amazing.

Will be interesting to follow this as a test case for some of the enshrined views by people on this forum on both 'sides' – my assumption is that they will get off with a fine or warning.

The person that shared the video may get in more trouble with the law, and probably with their group as it's the only reason they're being exposed. The person who revealed their actual face rather than their public face with the 'ninja' comment could also be in a bit of s***.

Other than that, on current evidence I can't see who else would get slammed. If they all get jailed without trial or evidence I'll craft my own special tin hat made from the very finest bacofoil.

And they might have to move out of Norwood. Probably for the best.

This is far too rational a post for this forum mate, come on.

 


Tw@tter:

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View cryrst's Profile cryrst Flag Chatham 07 Nov 18 3.28pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by Pussay Patrol

Now, for clarity, your inference was that the cladding was erected because of EU policy about energy efficiency? So are you of the belief that were we not in the EU, we wouldn't have done it? I'd have thought being energy efficient and Investing in housing stock was just common sense. Blaming the EU because we ballsed it up is a little disingenuous

Again!!!!
Not blaming anyone
I was stating what i beleive was fact.
And FYI i reckon in MY opinion that global warming AND climate change are natural and we as humans have not interfered with it.
Co2 in the atmosphere is 0.0039- 0.004 %
That hasnt changed since we recorded it.
That is like 4parts in a 1000.
Off topic yes but just so you get my thought on it.
As for the EU i voted remain so again you get my thought.
Now on topic basically these guys dropped the ball by what they did but they didnt kill anyone or start the fire.
6 stabbed dead in a week and i bet the perpetrators arnt named in the paper.
Everyone f***s up at some stage.
Let it go.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 9 of 11 < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Grenfell bonfire