Tulse Hill may be cancelled
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
  Wisbech Eagle  Truro Cornwall 26 Mar 22 3.03pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
The guy who supported the creation of the problem.....then berates the inevitable consequences of it. It's people like him...that should be the ones going into the mosques and enforcing these laws. When it's your politics that have created the mess, then it's people like you who should clear it up......good luck with that. Not hiding away in leafy nice areas of the country where your global village politics aren't even welcome. And to think he thinks countries without these problems should welcome them in. Edited by Stirlingsays (26 Mar 2022 2.39pm) Misrepresentations should be anticipated as they are the usual response" I no more "supported the creation of the problem" than I have flown to the moon. I think we have allowed the "problem" to develop by not acting soon enough to ensure that religious belief is kept out of our schooling, not insisting that British values are taught to all on arrival and that zero tolerance is shown to anyone who transgresses. There's been an assumption that time solves everything and, whilst there is some truth in that, it has meant too many large divisions have happened in the meantime. I expect everyone, whatever their background, to accept British values and behaviour if they live here. Zero exceptions. Those who cannot accept that should not come. If they do, they must. This is the primary reason I want all religious belief removed from the public square. We need to make a clear and unambiguous statement about what is of paramount importance to being British. By all means let people celebrate their cultural heritage, but when the chips are down, make sure we know exactly what side of the fence we are on. We are where we are. Moaning about it isn't going to change anything. Only doing things will. That demands action of everyone. Deepening divisions won't help, but trying to improve relationships will, no matter how often approaches are rejected.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
BlueJay  UK 27 Mar 22 3.04am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
They are rules. Are you seriously comparing golf to Islam? Senility must have set in. He was making a distinction between something being an agreement between whoever (family, community) and law. That would seem to be relevant. That you tag on a 'senility' comment (again) just because the poster is old, is a little petty. I would imagine that many of those you have cared about in life have been aged, and indeed you will be in that position one day yourself. For one he clearly isn't displaying such symptoms (it's just a childish 'angle', like your race obsession sh!te), and secondly even if he was deteriorating due to age, is that really some kind of infinite well of hilarity for you? Edited by BlueJay (27 Mar 2022 3.26am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 27 Mar 22 4.04am |
 |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by BlueJay
He was making a distinction between something being an agreement between whoever (family, community) and law. That would seem to be relevant. That you tag on a 'senility' comment (again) just because the poster is old, is a little petty. I would imagine that many of those you have cared about in life have been aged, and indeed you will be in that position one day yourself. For one he clearly isn't displaying such symptoms (it's just a childish 'angle', like your race obsession sh!te), and secondly even if he was deteriorating due to age, is that really some kind of infinite well of hilarity for you?
All this from the guy who was quite happy to call dying people 'prats' just because they made a health decision he didn't agree with.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| BlueJay UK 27 Mar 22 4.45am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
All this from the guy who was quite happy to call dying people 'prats' just because they made a health decision he didn't agree with. Incorrect - and irrelevant to the conversation. It had nothing to do with making a decision that 'I didn't agree with', and a lot to do with making a decision that cost them their lives (that you're politically 'fine' with and so view criticism of to be incorrect). My encouragement to vaccinate provably would've saved some of the lives I talked of, your 'do what you like' logically ended some where people took that tack. I wasn't addressing you anyway, but considering the standard of your conduct, the faux outrage has a short shelf life. Edited by BlueJay (27 Mar 2022 5.39am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Slimey Toad  Karsiyaka, North Cyprus 27 Mar 22 7.56am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Misrepresentations should be anticipated as they are the usual response" I no more "supported the creation of the problem" than I have flown to the moon. I think we have allowed the "problem" to develop by not acting soon enough to ensure that religious belief is kept out of our schooling, not insisting that British values are taught to all on arrival and that zero tolerance is shown to anyone who transgresses. There's been an assumption that time solves everything and, whilst there is some truth in that, it has meant too many large divisions have happened in the meantime. I expect everyone, whatever their background, to accept British values and behaviour if they live here. Zero exceptions. Those who cannot accept that should not come. If they do, they must. This is the primary reason I want all religious belief removed from the public square. We need to make a clear and unambiguous statement about what is of paramount importance to being British. By all means let people celebrate their cultural heritage, but when the chips are down, make sure we know exactly what side of the fence we are on. We are where we are. Moaning about it isn't going to change anything. Only doing things will. That demands action of everyone. Deepening divisions won't help, but trying to improve relationships will, no matter how often approaches are rejected. This cannot be achieved whilst a historic belief system is deeply tied to the ethnicity of a sizeable group of citizens. A lot of my local friends are self-professed atheists (I consider myself fortunate to live in probably the most secular 'muslim' state in the World) but still call themselves muslims.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 27 Mar 22 10.20am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by BlueJay
Incorrect - and irrelevant to the conversation. It had nothing to do with making a decision that 'I didn't agree with', and a lot to do with making a decision that cost them their lives (that you're politically 'fine' with and so view criticism of to be incorrect). My encouragement to vaccinate provably would've saved some of the lives I talked of, your 'do what you like' logically ended some where people took that tack. I wasn't addressing you anyway, but considering the standard of your conduct, the faux outrage has a short shelf life. Edited by BlueJay (27 Mar 2022 5.39am) It's not incorrect it's factual. You used the word 'prats' in that context. If you want to call Hrolf 'petty' we can call you insensitive. I wouldn't even mention it if you weren't so obsessed with moral superiority displays. My approach was the position designed for these pandemics. I believe in treating people like adults, providing the information we know on death risk and encouraging vaccination for the most at risk and advice for everyone else.....Essentially the Great Barrington declaration position. Your position wasn't based on that and involved recommending vaccination for young people at far less risk. We have already seen health implications there. Your position would have also made lockdowns inevitable as people would have insisted that national policy be based upon lowest possible risk regardless of national cost. Indeed that's what happened. As for the fact you weren't addressing me....ok, but Hrolf wasn't addressing you either.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 27 Mar 22 10.29am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
All this from the guy who was quite happy to call dying people 'prats' just because they made a health decision he didn't agree with. I see you defend the indefensible again in the case of your buddy. It was a deeply unpleasant slur meant to infict pain. Better to suggest an apology. Or does right-leaning trump decency?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 27 Mar 22 10.43am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
I see you defend the indefensible again in the case of your buddy. It was a deeply unpleasant slur meant to infict pain. Better to suggest an apology. Or does right-leaning trump decency? Hrolf can say whatever the feck he wants to say. Calling someone senile is fine (though wasn't it insane?), anyway I don't have your eagerness to support censorship. Which apparently goes missing when it's applied to people you like. If you don't like something criticise it, personally I agree with Hrolf's incredulity. Edited by Stirlingsays (27 Mar 2022 11.07am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mapletree Croydon 27 Mar 22 11.08am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Hrolf can say whatever the feck he wants to say AND I WILL SUPPORT HIM REGARDLESS Calling someone senile is fine, I don't have your eagerness to support censorship. Which apparently goes missing when it's applied to people you like. If you don't like something criticise it, personally I agree with Hrolf's incredulity. EFA
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| BlueJay UK 27 Mar 22 11.50am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
It's not incorrect it's factual. You used the word 'prats' in that context. If you want to call Hrolf 'petty' we can call you insensitive. I wouldn't even mention it if you weren't so obsessed with moral superiority displays. My approach was the position designed for these pandemics. I believe in treating people like adults, providing the information we know on death risk and encouraging vaccination for the most at risk and advice for everyone else.....Essentially the Great Barrington declaration position. Your position wasn't based on that and involved recommending vaccination for young people at far less risk. We have already seen health implications there. Your position would have also made lockdowns inevitable as people would have insisted that national policy be based upon lowest possible risk regardless of national cost. Indeed that's what happened. As for the fact you weren't addressing me....ok, but Hrolf wasn't addressing you either.
I have little interest in expanding on my previous comment because it accurately describes something that you seek to contort. I think what you see as 'moral superiority displays' is just having a moral code, but I can understand why it would appear that way to you.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 27 Mar 22 11.50am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
EFA It's a reasonable criticism. Hrolf and me do differ on certain subjects but we agree on many others. That's true for most of us and I respect diversity of thought in my opponents so why wouldn't I for my allies. I sometimes think that a less politically tribal approach would be better for everyone but it's not really how humans work. And fighting human nature is rarely winnable. If you're going to point out differences with your friends then text is rarely the best medium as it only has adversarial cues and a lack of modifiers. Besides you are kind of criticising me for something you rarely do yourself. Edited by Stirlingsays (27 Mar 2022 11.59am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 27 Mar 22 11.58am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by BlueJay
I have little interest in expanding on my previous comment because it accurately describes something that you seek to contort. I think what you see as 'moral superiority displays' is just having a moral code, but I can understand why it would appear that way to you. I disagree, you simply regard your insults as valid while regarding his as less so. I don't necessarily criticise having a moral code, which are just principles. However there is a line between that and self righteousness to which I think you are often blind. Edited by Stirlingsays (27 Mar 2022 11.59am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.