Thread: What the F*** is goin on in the UK

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

And your point is... ? That has nothing to do with "right-wing liberals".

you can call it Conservative Liberalism if you like.

Originally Posted by colourful-era

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

And your point is... ? That has nothing to do with "right-wing liberals".

you can call it Conservative Liberalism if you like.

That's the point, attaching a label is an unnecessary limitation. As has already been noted these labels can and do very between countries; they are pointless and ultimately meaningless. Any meaning you ascribe to them (and by virture of that another group of people) is only meaningful to you.

I am a right-wing Communist if you must know. -but this could mean many things from being an outright Nazi to a Socialist -

So yes, I agree - these types of labels could more or less be interpreted in any way you saw fit and are really only of use in the Political Science classroom.

still, it's always fun to try and argue over the toss of a coin with you.

Originally Posted by colourful-era

still, it's always fun to try and argue over the toss of a coin with you.

Heads.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by colourful-era

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

And your point is... ? That has nothing to do with "right-wing liberals".

you can call it Conservative Liberalism if you like.

That's the point, attaching a label is an unnecessary limitation. As has already been noted these labels can and do very between countries; they are pointless and ultimately meaningless. Any meaning you ascribe to them (and by virture of that another group of people) is only meaningful to you.

Simplistic tosh!

Providing terms are defined and understood then labels are indispensable as a means of communicating information. The problem I think you are trying to explain is that more often than not most are too stupid or ignorant to take pains to understand what it is they actually mean. That's not the fault of language but of it's application.

Labels are good, Sainsbury's been using them for years .......

Good grief, have these people nothing better to do? A toddler turning its nose up at unfamiliar food does NOT constitute racism you fucking TWATS. The toddler doesn't associate food with race.

Toddlers who dislike spicy food 'racist'

By Rosa Prince, Political Correspondent
Last Updated: 10:15AM BST 07/07/2008
Toddlers who turn their noses up at spicy food from overseas could be branded racists by a Government-sponsored agency.

The National Children's Bureau, which receives £12 million a year, mainly from Government funded organisations, has issued guidance to play leaders and nursery teachers advising them to be alert for racist incidents among youngsters in their care.
This could include a child of as young as three who says "yuk" in response to being served unfamiliar foreign food.
The guidance by the NCB is designed to draw attention to potentially-racist attitudes in youngsters from a young age.



It alerts playgroup leaders that even babies can not be ignored in the drive to root out prejudice as they can "recognise different people in their lives".
The 366-page guide for staff in charge of pre-school children, called Young Children and Racial Justice, warns: "Racist incidents among children in early years settings tend to be around name-calling, casual thoughtless comments and peer group relationships."
It advises nursery teachers to be on the alert for childish abuse such as: "blackie", "Pakis", "those people" or "they smell".
The guide goes on to warn that children might also "react negatively to a culinary tradition other than their own by saying 'yuk'".
Staff are told: "No racist incident should be ignored. When there is a clear racist incident, it is necessary to be specific in condemning the action."
Warning that failing to pick children up on their racist attitudes could instil prejudice, the NCB adds that if children "reveal negative attitudes, the lack of censure may indicate to the child that there is nothing unacceptable about such attitudes".
Nurseries are encouraged to report as many incidents as possible to their local council. The guide added: "Some people think that if a large number of racist incidents are reported, this will reflect badly on the institution. In fact, the opposite is the case."

Toddlers who dislike spicy food racist, say report - Telegraph

Originally Posted by thegent

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by colourful-era

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

And your point is... ? That has nothing to do with "right-wing liberals".

you can call it Conservative Liberalism if you like.

That's the point, attaching a label is an unnecessary limitation. As has already been noted these labels can and do very between countries; they are pointless and ultimately meaningless. Any meaning you ascribe to them (and by virture of that another group of people) is only meaningful to you.

Simplistic tosh!

Providing terms are defined and understood then labels are indispensable as a means of communicating information...

I see what you're getting at there but you're off on a tangent. We're talking political labels here, the point is that they are only 'defined and understood' by the person applying them. "Liberal" in the US is vastly different from "Liberal" as it is applied in the UK. It can even differ between users in any one country.

Tangental thinking was neither my aim nor was it apparent in my post which with all respect I do not think you have actually understood otherwise you would not have said what you did.

Never mind, it comes as no surprise.

Semantics are given short shrift in today's world not least because the sloppy of thought continually, and probably fashionably since industry is definitely passe, confuse the subject with pedantry.

In a word, most modern drivel resolves to laziness which probably explains the existence of Britvic and his incessant banality which in any right thinking society would have ended in his crucifixion on the cross of mediocrity which you seem to be championing by your silliness.

You remind me of the precocious child of 5 whose potential ran out when the jelly did.

Please up your game, if you have one.

Toodle pip!

You really shouldn't use a phrase such as "due respect" if all you're going to do following that is indulge yourself in some ad hominem dressed up as rational/intellectual discourse.

Frankly it matters not one jot whether I understood what you said or not because I know what I meant. It is you who seems to be having difficulty grasping my meaning so your tangental ranting and deconstructing of a strawman is irrelevant. We're off-topic here and I'm not going to defend what I said in response to your post referencing my original when you have clearly failed to understand it.

And no matter how many syllables you use in your insults they're still insults and betray a lack of intellect. Not too mention being utterly childish.

That should be " not TO mention ".

Ad hominem comments are fun and add spice to an otherwise paltry diet hardly worth consuming.

What's your problem? You remind me of Sabaijai/Joe Cummings on TV who also wittered on about ad hominem attacks particularly when he had been bested in arguments he only half understood.

Lighten up lad and show a little dexterity with that keyboard.

Anyways, anarcho syndicalism, nihilism, stalinism, fascism and antidisestablishmentarianism are all examples of valid political labels universally understood and still applicable in a modern context should one wish to expound in such terms.

So, where is your argument now?

Originally Posted by gjbkk

What the F*** is goin on in the UK

Not sure. Something about right, left, liberal, conservative, stuff.

All a mystery how it applies to the OP!

Originally Posted by thegent

That should be " not TO mention ".

Ad hominem comments are fun and add spice to an otherwise paltry diet hardly worth consuming.

What's your problem? You remind me of Sabaijai/Joe Cummings on TV who also wittered on about ad hominem attacks particularly when he had been bested in arguments he only half understood.

Lighten up lad and show a little dexterity with that keyboard.

thegent (that’s meant to be ironic, is it?),

I don't have a problem. If you want to debate the issue, any issue for that matter, then go right ahead.

However if your goal is just to drown me out in an ever rising flood of verbosity, spell-checking my posts, unlilaterally declaring yourself the 'winner', condescension and multiple-syllable insults then you’ll have to find the salve for whatever insecurity it is that drives you elsewhere. Basically, I can’t be bothered. You call it "fun", I say it's tedious and juvenile - look at how much time has already been wasted with what is nothing more than ancillary and pointless nonsense at the expense of reasonable debate.

Anyways, anarcho syndicalism, nihilism, stalinism, fascism and antidisestablishmentarianism are all examples of valid political labels universally understood and still applicable in a modern context should one wish to expound in such terms.

So, where is your argument now?

"Universally understood", there's my argument. The examples you've given very well may be but that's irrelevant; the labels in issue aren't and that's the entire point.

Suprised no-one has posted the Littlejohn article today about The Isle of White Council advetising for Air Traffic Controllers using application forms in Braile.

Then again, this thread is now a private spat between Ant & Gent. A bit like Ant & Dec, but without the humour...

Originally Posted by bkkandrew

Then again, this thread is now a private spat between Ant & Gent. A bit like Ant & Dec, but without the humour...

Six total posts in a 9pg thread... How does that work then?

^Guess it just seems more due to the tedium.

As you were then...

Guess it just seems more due to the tedium

Excite us with the Littlejohn article then why don't you.

OK:

Blind leading the blind on the Scilly Billy islands

A few years ago, a London council advertised for van drivers. It particularly welcomed applications from the visually impaired.

I can remember thinking at the time that 'WANTED: Blind Drivers' was about as daft as 'diversity' got.

You expect this kind of mindless madness from the more deranged metropolitan authorities. But now the Scilly Islands has gone one better. An advert for an air traffic controller offered application forms in Braille. I'm sorry, I'll just feel that again.

The Scilly Islands council argues that it had no option under equal opportunities legislation. That, presumably, is also why it recently printed forms for an internal vacancy in several different languages, some of them scribble. Only existing employees were able to apply.

And how many members of ethnic minorities does this remote island council employ? None. That doesn't prevent everyone seeking a job from having to fill in a 'diversity' monitoring form, inviting them to choose their ethnic origin from 21 different categories.

Needless to say, 'English' is not one of them. I wonder if they do Braille in 21 different languages, too.

As Denis Healey might have said: 'What a lot of Scilly Billies.'

Six years for sex on an Arab beach... what did she expect? | Mail Online

This article about recent violence in London, and urban planning in London. I cannot comment, so if anyone from the UK wants to, please do:

An interview with Enrique Peñalosa, the much in demand urban theorist and former mayor of Bogotá, perhaps sums up shopping malls best in the current issue of Monocle with the line: “when malls become a meeting place, it’s a sign that a city is sick.” That the people responsible for London’s built environment allowed such a development to move forward requires an official inquiry.

Beginning:

Band-Aids won’t save Britain

By Tyler Brûlé
July 18 2008


How can you tell when a developed country is on a fast-track to becoming a failing or failed state? Does it only become official when Christiane Amanpour – CNN’s chief international correspondent – shows up with a documentary crew to chronicle a nation’s unchecked decline? Or can a big, fat “FAILED” stamp be applied long before there’s enough material to persuade an advertiser to sponsor the show?

Last Sunday I returned to Britain after a week spent weaving through Switzerland visiting clients, seeing friends and imagining the future of the media with my colleagues. Over the course of the weekend a large part of our conversation focused on the wave of knife crimes and general disorder that is currently suffocating the UK. There was a collective sense of disbelief and embarrassment when we read that some clever spark advising the Home Secretary wanted to take young knife wielders into hospitals and family sitting rooms to meet victims and distraught parents alike.

On a train from St. Moritz to Zürich, there was a subtle sense of wonder, not only at the low cost of a clean, punctual journey but also that wi-fi was available on the higher speed portion of the trip and the bar trolley dispensed a decent espresso. At Zürich airport, security staff were swift and efficient in their handling of passengers and, at the advertised hour, our Airbus pushed back for the flight to London.

Seventy-five minutes later, we arrived at a terminal that was heaving with annoyed, bewildered passengers and had the faint odour of failure – sweat, mildew, urine and a nasty scent attempting to cover up all of the former. Now, before you race to your laptop and write to tell me that Geneva’s Cointrin airport ain’t exactly great either and that Switzerland is a dull, dangerous place full of far too many referendums that should never see the light of day – keep reading.
As we made our way into central London, we travelled along a rubbish-lined motorway and then turned on to rubbish-strewn streets. Set back from the curb were shuttered shopfronts, little street-life and patchy street lighting.

Further along, we hit the impossibly ugly high street that runs along the top of Shepherd’s Bush, then caught a glimpse of the even uglier new shopping development behind it. Why a relatively central stretch of London requires a suburban style of planning is still a mystery. That this plot of land hasn’t been turned into a proper mixed-use, awe-inspiring building to further generate development in the UK will go down in the history of urbanism as one of the great, wasted opportunites of the 21st century.

Link: FT.com / Columnists / Tyler Brûlé - Band-Aids won’t save Britain

Photographing thugs 'is assault', police tell householder snapping proof of anti-social behaviour



A householder who took photographs of hooded teenagers as evidence of their anti-social behaviour says he was told he was breaking the law after they called the police.

David Green, 64, and his neighbours had been plagued by the youths from a nearby comprehensive school for months, and was advised by their headmaster to identify them so action could be taken.


One of Mr Green's pictures shows two hooded teenagers, one making an obscene gesture towards the camera

But when Mr Green left his £1million London flat to take photographs of the gang, who were aged around 17, he said one threatened to kill him while another called the police on his mobile.

And he claimed that a Police Community Support Officer sent to the scene promptly issued a warning that taking pictures of youths without permission was illegal, and could lead to a charge of assault.


Concern: David Green


Last night Mr Green, a television cameraman, said he was appalled that the legal system's first priority seemed not to be stopping frightening anti-social behaviour by aggressive youths, but protecting them from being photographed by the concerned public.

Mr Green, a father of two, lives with his programme-maker wife Judy in a penthouse flat close to Waterloo station.

He said: 'We've had problems with this group shouting abuse and throwing stones for months, and were asked to identify them.

'When I went to take photographs of eight of them throwing cans of Coke around, six of them ran away, one threatened to kill me, and another one started phoning the police.

'A couple of hours later a Police Community Support Officer told me I had been accused of assault, though no such thing occurred, and told me I was not allowed to take photographs of teenagers on the street.

'I think it's wrong that when teenagers are running riot and the police are called, it's about me, and I'm treated like a criminal.

'In South London we all know how many stabbings there have been, and I think the police should be busy catching the real bad people.'


Mr Green said he handed his pictures to a deputy headmaster at the nearby Nautical School, and was promised the matter would be investigated.

A Metropolitan Police spokesman said the force had no record of the incident.

Last week the Daily Mail reported that a father was told by a play equipment supervisor he was not allowed to take pictures of his own children on a slide.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...behaviour.html

That typifies the malaise we are suffering from, the rights of the scrote outweigh everything else.

The Nanny State gone mad.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/7524526.stm

Smokers should be put in the stocks. It would save them 30 quid.

UK universities breeding Islamic extremism.

GLOBAL JIHAD
1 in 3 Muslim students approve killing for Islam
'Stop talking about celebrating diversity and focus on integration and assimilation'
Posted: July 26, 2008
7:25 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily
If ignorance and poverty are responsible for the growth of extremist views in the Islamic world, someone needs ask to Muslim students, privileged enough and bright enough to attend some of the United Kingdom's best universities, why one-in-three of them endorses killing in the name of Islam.
The report of this finding, based on a poll of 600 Muslim and 800 non-Muslim students at 12 universities in the UK, and conducted by YouGov on behalf of the Center for Social Cohesion, will be released tomorrow as "Islam on Campus."
Among its findings of Muslim beliefs:

• 40 per cent support introduction of sharia into British law for Muslims
• One-third back the idea of a worldwide Islamic caliphate based on sharia law
• 40 per believe it is unacceptable for Muslim men and women to associate freely
• 24 per cent do not think men and women are equal in the eyes of Allah
• 25 percent have little or no respect for homosexuals.
• 53 per cent believe killing in the name of religion is never justified (compared with 94 per cent of non-Muslims), while 32 per cent say it is
• 57 percent believe Muslim soldiers serving in the UK military should be able to refuse duty in Muslim countries
• More than half favor an Islamic political party to support their views in parliament
• One-third don't think or don't know if Islam is compatible with Western views of democracy

"Significant numbers appear to hold beliefs which contravene democratic values," Hannah Stuart, one of the report's authors, told the London Times. "These results are deeply embarrassing for those who have said there is no extremism in British universities."
The report echoes one released last year by the Policy Exchange which found 37% of all Muslims aged 16-24 would prefer to live under a sharia system.
In addition to polling of 1,400 students, the researchers visited more than 20 universities to interview students and listen to guest speakers brought on campus. The report notes radical Islamic preachers regularly deliver inflammatory speeches that target homosexuals and border on anti-Semitism.


"Our researchers found a ghettoized mentality among Muslim students at Queen Mary (college)," said James Brandon, deputy director at CSC. "Also, we found the segregation between Muslim men and women at events more visible at Queen Mary."
A spokesman for Queen Mary told the Times the university knew Islamic preachers had spoken on campus but was unaware of what they had said.
"Clearly, we in no way associate ourselves with these views. However, also integral to the spirit of university life is free speech and debate, and on occasion speakers will make statements that are deemed offensive," he said.
Wes Streeting, president of the National Union of Students, condemned the study: "This disgusting report is a reflection of the biases and prejudices of a right-wing think tank – not the views of Muslim students across Britain. Only 632 Muslim students were asked vague and misleading questions, and their answers were willfully misinterpreted."
The report was criticized by the country's largest Muslim student body, the Federation of Student Islamic Societies. Most of the Islamic societies on campuses operate under the FOSIS umbrella.
The authors of the report note that campus Islamic societies have, in the past, been where some UK terrorists became radicalized. They cite Kafeel Ahmed, who drove a jeep engulfed in flames into a building at the Glasgow airport last year and died of his burns. Investigators believe he adopted jihadist beliefs while studying at Anglia Ruskin university, Cambridge.
In April, WND reported that the director-general of MI5 had warned the government that donations of hundreds of millions of pounds from Saudi Arabia and powerful Muslim organizations in Pakistan, Indonesia and the Gulf Straits had led to a "dangerous increase in the spread of extremism in leading university campuses."
"The finding that a large number of students think it is okay to kill in the name of religion is alarming," said Anthony Glees, professor of security and intelligence studies at Buckingham University.
"There is a wide cultural divide between Muslim and non-Muslim students. The solution is to stop talking about celebrating diversity and focus on integration and assimilation."

1 in 3 Muslim students approve killing for Islam

New Labour have produced an almost totalitarian Big brother Nanny state. Libertarianism is the only way yeah!