You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Honours List
April 15 2024 10.28pm

Honours List

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 3 of 3 << First< 1 2 3

 

Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 31 Mar 24 9.37am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by PalazioVecchio

Thatchers poor judgement ? Well she did defend General Pinochet.

Savile ? The documentary that covered his apparent friendship with senior royals ....maybe that explains a lot ?


The honours list ? How about that woman arrested for praying silently near an abortion clinic ?

Rewarding any kind of religious extremism, even if it involves someone standing silently, would establish a precedent that no one ought accept.

 


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 Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 31 Mar 24 2.43pm Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Rewarding any kind of religious extremism, even if it involves someone standing silently, would establish a precedent that no one ought accept.

The only extremism that was rewarded, by arrested someone for standing silently in a public street, was the extremism of left wing crackpot know-alls.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 31 Mar 24 8.02pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by georgenorman

The only extremism that was rewarded, by arrested someone for standing silently in a public street, was the extremism of left wing crackpot know-alls.

Here we go again!

She wasnít arrested for standing silently in a public street.

She was arrested for deliberately breaking an exclusion order after being warned several times. The exclusion order was in place around a clinic that had been targeted by people like her, because they disagreed with the services provided , who indulged in behaviour regarded as intimidatory. Her beliefs are founded on religion and she is supported by an American ďChurchĒ who carry out the same type of activity in the USA.

There are thousands of public streets she can stand silently in without anything happening, other than being thought weird. Just not the ones where restrictions apply.

This was exteme behaviour by a religious fanatic. You simply cannot issue free passes on illegal behaviour just because that behaviour springs from a religious belief. Do that and you open the flood gates.

 


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 Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 31 Mar 24 8.51pm Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Here we go again!

She wasnít arrested for standing silently in a public street.

She was arrested for deliberately breaking an exclusion order after being warned several times. The exclusion order was in place around a clinic that had been targeted by people like her, because they disagreed with the services provided , who indulged in behaviour regarded as intimidatory. Her beliefs are founded on religion and she is supported by an American ďChurchĒ who carry out the same type of activity in the USA.

There are thousands of public streets she can stand silently in without anything happening, other than being thought weird. Just not the ones where restrictions apply.

This was exteme behaviour by a religious fanatic. You simply cannot issue free passes on illegal behaviour just because that behaviour springs from a religious belief. Do that and you open the flood gates.

Here you go again with your deliberate misrepresentation of the incident.

She was not banned from being that street. She was banned from protesting in that vicinity.

It shows how extremist you are in saying that a person merely standing silently in a street that she is entitled to be in, is the protestation of a religious fanatic.

It is people who think this Orwellian arrest was justified who are the extremist fanatics.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 31 Mar 24 9.47pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by georgenorman

Here you go again with your deliberate misrepresentation of the incident.

She was not banned from being that street. She was banned from protesting in that vicinity.

It shows how extremist you are in saying that a person merely standing silently in a street that she is entitled to be in, is the protestation of a religious fanatic.

It is people who think this Orwellian arrest was justified who are the extremist fanatics.

The only one deliberately misrepresenting anything is you. She was arrested for deliberately flouting a ďPublic Spaces Protection OrderĒ. Which is something that applies to you, me, her and everyone. Whether or not we agree with the reasons it has been granted or not is immaterial. We all must abide by its requirements. No excuses.

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce is an unapologetic ďpro-lifeĒ religious extremist. What she, or you, think she was doing whilst breaking the order doesnít matter to the police. They have an obligation to administer the order in the way they think fit. Any defence would then have to be raised with magistrates. In fact, having achieved their objective the police dropped any charges. She also achieved her objectives by getting a lot of publicity. Who videoed her arrest? Were the cameras there by chance or was this all staged?

Now it seems this issue, which has been due to be clarified by parliament, with general agreement being reached by MPs, is being tampered with by the government who are pandering to religious pressure. This isnít healthy:-

[Link]


 


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 Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 31 Mar 24 10.28pm Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

The only one deliberately misrepresenting anything is you. She was arrested for deliberately flouting a ďPublic Spaces Protection OrderĒ. Which is something that applies to you, me, her and everyone. Whether or not we agree with the reasons it has been granted or not is immaterial. We all must abide by its requirements. No excuses.

Isabel Vaughan-Spruce is an unapologetic ďpro-lifeĒ religious extremist. What she, or you, think she was doing whilst breaking the order doesnít matter to the police. They have an obligation to administer the order in the way they think fit. Any defence would then have to be raised with magistrates. In fact, having achieved their objective the police dropped any charges. She also achieved her objectives by getting a lot of publicity. Who videoed her arrest? Were the cameras there by chance or was this all staged?

Now it seems this issue, which has been due to be clarified by parliament, with general agreement being reached by MPs, is being tampered with by the government who are pandering to religious pressure. This isnít healthy:-

[Link]

She didn't flout any order, she was entitled to be in that street.

The police dropped the charges because they knew the arrest was a crock of you know what.

Someone concerned about the termination of nascent life is not an extremist, anyone who thinks they are is the extremist.

It isn't healthy when people support the arresting of individuals for merely being in a public street doing nothing. It isn't healthy when people promote the casual termination of nascent life. But these are the stances of deleterious left wing crackpots.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 01 Apr 24 12.28am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by georgenorman

She didn't flout any order, she was entitled to be in that street.

The police dropped the charges because they knew the arrest was a crock of you know what.

Someone concerned about the termination of nascent life is not an extremist, anyone who thinks they are is the extremist.

It isn't healthy when people support the arresting of individuals for merely being in a public street doing nothing. It isn't healthy when people promote the casual termination of nascent life. But these are the stances of deleterious left wing crackpots.

Itís not up to you, or me, to decide if there is a prima facie case of the order being broken. Thatís the responsibility of the police, which they reluctantly accomplished having tried on several occasions to defuse the situation in other ways. The lady sought arrest. Thatís why the cameras were there.

She is most certainly a religious extremist. She, and you, are as entitled to your opinions as I am to mine. I completely disagree with yours. What she is not entitled to do is break the law, or ignore the instructions of the police in their efforts to impose the law, in pursuit of those opinions. If she does, she will be arrested and removed. She holds opinions that are extreme, in that they have no room for compromise or respect for the rights of others. Other religious extremists reach their positions in similar ways.

There is nothing inherently right or left about this. Respecting the opinions of others and allowing them to take their own decisions is something we all ought to do.

This has gone on long enough and isnít the first time you have tried to defend this behaviour.

It has nothing to do with the honours list. Only that someone introduced it again because they have fallen for the chicanery of a religious political activist.

I will leave it there. Attempting to convince you of the obvious is a waste of time.

 


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 Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View the silurian's Profile the silurian Flag The garden of England.(not really) 01 Apr 24 7.27am Send a Private Message to the silurian Add the silurian as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Itís not up to you, or me, to decide if there is a prima facie case of the order being broken. Thatís the responsibility of the police, which they reluctantly accomplished having tried on several occasions to defuse the situation in other ways. The lady sought arrest. Thatís why the cameras were there.

She is most certainly a religious extremist. She, and you, are as entitled to your opinions as I am to mine. I completely disagree with yours. What she is not entitled to do is break the law, or ignore the instructions of the police in their efforts to impose the law, in pursuit of those opinions. If she does, she will be arrested and removed. She holds opinions that are extreme, in that they have no room for compromise or respect for the rights of others. Other religious extremists reach their positions in similar ways.

There is nothing inherently right or left about this. Respecting the opinions of others and allowing them to take their own decisions is something we all ought to do.

This has gone on long enough and isnít the first time you have tried to defend this behaviour.

It has nothing to do with the honours list. Only that someone introduced it again because they have fallen for the chicanery of a religious political activist.

I will leave it there. Attempting to convince you of the obvious is a waste of time.

irony???

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 01 Apr 24 8.29am Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Itís not up to you, or me, to decide if there is a prima facie case of the order being broken. Thatís the responsibility of the police, which they reluctantly accomplished having tried on several occasions to defuse the situation in other ways. The lady sought arrest. Thatís why the cameras were there.

She is most certainly a religious extremist. She, and you, are as entitled to your opinions as I am to mine. I completely disagree with yours. What she is not entitled to do is break the law, or ignore the instructions of the police in their efforts to impose the law, in pursuit of those opinions. If she does, she will be arrested and removed. She holds opinions that are extreme, in that they have no room for compromise or respect for the rights of others. Other religious extremists reach their positions in similar ways.

There is nothing inherently right or left about this. Respecting the opinions of others and allowing them to take their own decisions is something we all ought to do.

This has gone on long enough and isnít the first time you have tried to defend this behaviour.

It has nothing to do with the honours list. Only that someone introduced it again because they have fallen for the chicanery of a religious political activist.

I will leave it there. Attempting to convince you of the obvious is a waste of time.

It is the start of a new month, and having reflected on your wise words, I accept and agree with everything that you have said.

Furthermore I think we should arrest these Christians who voice their beliefs when they are in their own homes and certainly whenever they are in public.

We should also campaign and donate to research into scientifically detecting silent prayer, the existing laws against which should also be strengthened (only for Christians of course).

Meanwhile all restrictions of the termination of nascent life should be removed and a feasibility study made of termination with 30 days of birth, as a sort of 'returns' policy - you know like Aamazon.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 01 Apr 24 8.53am Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by georgenorman

It is the start of a new month, and having reflected on your wise words, I accept and agree with everything that you have said.

Furthermore I think we should arrest these Christians who voice their beliefs when they are in their own homes and certainly whenever they are in public.

We should also campaign and donate to research into scientifically detecting silent prayer, the existing laws against which should also be strengthened (only for Christians of course).

Meanwhile all restrictions of the termination of nascent life should be removed and a feasibility study made of termination with 30 days of birth, as a sort of 'returns' policy - you know like Aamazon.

Wrong thread, I started one this morning

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View oohahh's Profile oohahh Flag Caterham 03 Apr 24 10.41am Send a Private Message to oohahh Add oohahh as a friend

I received an MBE in 2014 for services to my local community. Unexpected but very proud that someone put me forward and others supported the nomination. (And kept it quiet from me)
I was always against people receiving it for 'doing their job'. Bankers, Pop stars and actors for services to music or films etc.
I received mine from the Queen at Windsor. Thee were a few actors there as well and it was nice to see them, not just a bunch of us people that no one had heard of.
I think the awards should be decided on by a small committee of 'normal people' from all walks of life

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Badger11's Profile Badger11 Flag Beckenham 03 Apr 24 11.55am Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by oohahh

I received an MBE in 2014 for services to my local community. Unexpected but very proud that someone put me forward and others supported the nomination. (And kept it quiet from me)
I was always against people receiving it for 'doing their job'. Bankers, Pop stars and actors for services to music or films etc.
I received mine from the Queen at Windsor. Thee were a few actors there as well and it was nice to see them, not just a bunch of us people that no one had heard of.
I think the awards should be decided on by a small committee of 'normal people' from all walks of life

I'm glad your happy with your honour.

However as it was shown with the Cliff Richard knighthood the purpose of rewarding the public is simply to allow the politicians and Civil Servants to get their undeserved gongs. And on that point why is it that you get only get an MBE when some time serving Civil Servant gets a Knighthood for doing his job.

I don't believe reform will work the establishment will soon find a way to weasel their way back in.

A committee of ordinary people will soon look like the Board of Governors of the BBC or the Executive committee of the Garrett club.

 


One more point

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

 

Page 3 of 3 << First< 1 2 3

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Honours List