Coward Attacks Childrens Creche Multiple Children Stabbed Liverpool

a reply to: BedevereTheWise

What's more pitiful than anything I've read, heard or seen so far is you believing hook, line and sinker that these people are far-right extremists.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: BedevereTheWise

What's more pitiful than anything I've read, heard or seen so far is you believing hook, line and sinker that these people are far-right extremists.

Do ordinary people go around attacking mosques and asylum hostels?

You seem to have a very low opinion of ordinary British people.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
He has talked about protecting Muslims and mosque, while Muslims and mosques are being targeted for violence by hate groups.

British Muslims and British mosques.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
What would be pitiful and inadequate is pretending these far right racists represent ordinary British people.

Exactly!

Although, to nit pick, far-right and hard-left in the UK is sometimes hard to differentiate between in that respect especially in former mining and industrial areas.

originally posted by: BrucellaOrchitis

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
He has talked about protecting Muslims and mosque, while Muslims and mosques are being targeted for violence by hate groups.

British Muslims and British mosques.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
What would be pitiful and inadequate is pretending these far right racists represent ordinary British people.

Exactly!

Although, to nit pick, far-right and hard-left in the UK is sometimes hard to differentiate between in that respect especially in former mining and industrial areas.

I could substitute far-right with racist knuckle draggers, however the issue is less the idiots doing these acts than the individuals and groups manipulating them.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
I could substitute far-right with racist knuckle draggers, however the issue is less the idiots doing these acts than the individuals and groups manipulating them.

Racism is a difficult beast and many of those involved are simple thinkers but not necessarily knuckle draggers, they just lack any direct experience of those that they consider "others" and believe everything they are told because they want to believe there is a "other".

There is no coincidence that the majority of these incidents have ocurred in predominantly white areas - communities that don't really, on a day to day basis, mix with other ethnicities or if they do, they are more likely to be other white ethnicities. Thatcher tore the hearts out of their communities and they have been largely forgotten ever since. In some respects they have self-segregated, in others it's an economic segregation, and in still others, purely psychological and they have come to believe that the only agency they have is in their fists.

The issue is entirely with those manipulating that sense of victimhood, of feeling forgotten (because they genuinely were and have been) for their own ends.

Personally, I would like to see anyone under the age of 21 let off with a caution and a sliding scale be applied according to age, because really some of those involved should really know better, and I expect they did and do.

a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The feller has barely sat down in his new chair, at least pretend to give him a chance.

He's Prime Minister of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland not Team Leader at the local fall and call claims line.....you have to hit the floor running.

...... the majority voted for him......

Only they didn't did they.
The failings of our first-past-post system has never been so evident.

Personally I never expected much from Starmer....but I was prepared to give him a chance.
He's failed the first test.....miserably.

His lack of acknowledgement of people's grievances and the complete and utter contempt he has for them is unforgivable in my opinion.

originally posted by: BrucellaOrchitis

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
I could substitute far-right with racist knuckle draggers, however the issue is less the idiots doing these acts than the individuals and groups manipulating them.

Racism is a difficult beast and many of those involved are simple thinkers but not necessarily knuckle draggers, they just lack any direct experience of those that they consider "others" and believe everything they are told because they want to believe there is a "other".

There is no coincidence that the majority of these incidents have ocurred in predominantly white areas - communities that don't really, on a day to day basis, mix with other ethnicities or if they do, they are more likely to be other white ethnicities. Thatcher tore the hearts out of their communities and they have been largely forgotten ever since. In some respects they have self-segregated, in others it's an economic segregation, and in still others, purely psychological and they have come to believe that the only agency they have is in their fists.

The issue is entirely with those manipulating that sense of victimhood, of feeling forgotten (because they genuinely were and have been) for their own ends.

Personally, I would like to see anyone under the age of 21 let off with a caution and a sliding scale be applied according to age, because really some of those involved should really know better, and I expect they did and do.

We just sentenced a student, who was 20 I believe at the time, to 4 years for a non violent but highly disruptive protest.

What message would a caution be to people actually involved in violence?

I would have agreed with your position with regard the first couple of protests, immediately after the subject of this thread, when tempers where understandably high.

To continue with the violence now is inexcusable.

a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The feller has barely sat down in his new chair, at least pretend to give him a chance.

So for example if say Russia declared war on The UK a few weeks after Starmer became PM, would you expect him not to respond with the excuse that he is new to the job ?

The son of a tool maker likes to boast about how he sorted out the Labour Party after the Corbyn years, but he fails miserably when a real challenge comes before him.

Just like his assisant Rayner, he is pandering to certain sections of the population, and it's bloody obvious to all that have eyes to see. The man is divisive.












/

originally posted by: Freeborn
His lack of acknowledgement of people's grievances and the complete and utter contempt he has for them is unforgivable in my opinion.

How does it go? You can please some of the people, all of the time, all of the people some of the time...anyway some such nonsense, but surely you can get the jist.

(eye roll)

People and their grievances are largely being driven by an often wilfull ignorance which fails to address the problem let alone even approach a solution.

Those involved in the actual violence are just disposable pawns to those instigating it.

Perhaps we should be wondering why Tommy's got so many buddies in banking.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The feller has barely sat down in his new chair, at least pretend to give him a chance.

So for example if say Russia declared war on The UK a few weeks after Starmer became PM, would you expect him not to respond with the excuse that he is new to the job ?

The son of a tool maker likes to boast about how he sorted out the Labour Party after the Corbyn years, but he fails miserably when a real challenge comes before him.

Just like his assisant Rayner, he is pandering to certain sections of the population, and it's bloody obvious to all that have eyes to see. The man is divisive.












/

What do you want his response to be?

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

He has talked about protecting Muslims and mosque, while Muslims and mosques are being targeted for violence by hate groups.

Yet has made no mention of how he will protect Britains' and pubs while Brits and pubs are being targeted for violence by hate groups, Certainly, there is yet to be an order for police to protect pubs, as there has with mosques.

originally posted by: covent

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

He has talked about protecting Muslims and mosque, while Muslims and mosques are being targeted for violence by hate groups.

Yet has made no mention of how he will protect Britains' and pubs while Brits and pubs are being targeted for violence by hate groups, Certainly, there is yet to be an order for police to protect pubs, as there has with mosques.

So when talking about attacks directed towards Muslims he specifically mentioned Muslims.

Terrible.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The feller has barely sat down in his new chair, at least pretend to give him a chance.

So for example if say Russia declared war on The UK a few weeks after Starmer became PM, would you expect him not to respond with the excuse that he is new to the job ?

The son of a tool maker likes to boast about how he sorted out the Labour Party after the Corbyn years, but he fails miserably when a real challenge comes before him.

Just like his assisant Rayner, he is pandering to certain sections of the population, and it's bloody obvious to all that have eyes to see. The man is divisive.


/

What do you want his response to be?

Are you seriously saying Starmer lacks the intelligence to work that out for himself ?

So far his response has had the opposite effect on what he intended it to be.

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The feller has barely sat down in his new chair, at least pretend to give him a chance.

So for example if say Russia declared war on The UK a few weeks after Starmer became PM, would you expect him not to respond with the excuse that he is new to the job ?

The son of a tool maker likes to boast about how he sorted out the Labour Party after the Corbyn years, but he fails miserably when a real challenge comes before him.

Just like his assisant Rayner, he is pandering to certain sections of the population, and it's bloody obvious to all that have eyes to see. The man is divisive.


/

What do you want his response to be?

Are you seriously saying Starmer lacks the intelligence to work that out for himself ?

So far his response has had the opposite effect on what he intended it to be.

No I didn't say that or anything like that.

I asked you a question that you didn't answer.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
I would have agreed with your position with regard the first couple of protests, immediately after the subject of this thread, when tempers where understandably high.

Why were tempers "understandably high"? Children had been brutally targeted, and that makes people lose their tempers?

What made people lose their tempers was that they had short fuses and targeted misinformation was used to light those fuses.

The vast majority of people in the UK did not lose their tempers because a violent, horrible act ocurred but some people used it as an excuse for their existent temper exploding.

Those people who took part in the initial "protests" that became violent, were not locals to the area. When they left the area, what we could clearly see, is mostly youngsters, who were local to the area.

And, these are deprived areas, socially and economically, these youngsters are vulnerable to grooming.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
To continue with the violence now is inexcusable.

Fully developed adults, certainly. Young people's brains operate differently. Still developing those control areas of the brain. Smashing and setting fire to stuff, getting lairy with the police has a certain allure and has a lot less to do with actual racism at this point.

originally posted by: BrucellaOrchitis

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
I would have agreed with your position with regard the first couple of protests, immediately after the subject of this thread, when tempers where understandably high.

Why were tempers "understandably high"? Children had been brutally targeted, and that makes people lose their tempers?

What made people lose their tempers was that they had short fuses and targeted misinformation was used to light those fuses.

The vast majority of people in the UK did not lose their tempers because a violent, horrible act ocurred but some people used it as an excuse for their existent temper exploding.

Those people who took part in the initial "protests" that became violent, were not locals to the area. When they left the area, what we could clearly see, is mostly youngsters, who were local to the area.

And, these are deprived areas, socially and economically, these youngsters are vulnerable to grooming.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
To continue with the violence now is inexcusable.

Fully developed adults, certainly. Young people's brains operate differently. Still developing those control areas of the brain. Smashing and setting fire to stuff, getting lairy with the police has a certain allure and has a lot less to do with actual racism at this point.

We already have different rules around how we treat young people in criminal situations. I am not sure making this a special case helps in anyway and may even be counter productive.

The short fuse and misinformation argument may apply to the first few protests. If people are still using this as an excuse to target immigrants then I am going for wilful ignorance or outright racism as the driving factors.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The feller has barely sat down in his new chair, at least pretend to give him a chance.

So for example if say Russia declared war on The UK a few weeks after Starmer became PM, would you expect him not to respond with the excuse that he is new to the job ?

The son of a tool maker likes to boast about how he sorted out the Labour Party after the Corbyn years, but he fails miserably when a real challenge comes before him.

Just like his assisant Rayner, he is pandering to certain sections of the population, and it's bloody obvious to all that have eyes to see. The man is divisive.


/

What do you want his response to be?

Are you seriously saying Starmer lacks the intelligence to work that out for himself ?

So far his response has had the opposite effect on what he intended it to be.

No I didn't say that or anything like that.

I asked you a question that you didn't answer.

I don't have to give an answer, i am not the PM.

If you want an answer drop Starmer a e mail. That's what he is being paid for, to sort out the bloody mess we are in.

All he has done so far is make it worse.

originally posted by: alldaylong
So for example if say Russia declared war on The UK a few weeks after Starmer became PM, would you expect him not to respond with the excuse that he is new to the job ?

I don't think he is making that excuse, he seems to be utilising the resources available to him and relying on the myriad of expertise at his disposal.

Responding to a crisis, in this country, is generally well prepared for, multiple such scenarios have standard operating procedures in place should that eventually arise based on the reality of our situation in terms of resource availability. All Starmer has to do is nod or shake his head in the right places and handle the finer details.

It was more the day to day policy making, that he is actually responsible for, I was referring to, like listening to long-standing grievances from "ordinary people".

Besides, in the current "crisis" I just think it is far too early in the game to determine how effective his actions are and will be. Or not as the case may be.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
We already have different rules around how we treat young people in criminal situations. I am not sure making this a special case helps in anyway and may even be counter productive.

Yes we do, but I don't think they are entirely representative of our biology and could do with reappraisal - but I doubt that it is high on anyone's priorities at the moment. And in some cases, those under 21s are going to have previous already so are going to have sentences that are compounded on that.

As I said, it is a personal preference, not necessarily a popular one

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
The short fuse and misinformation argument may apply to the first few protests. If people are still using this as an excuse to target immigrants then I am going for wilful ignorance or outright racism as the driving factors.

Yes.

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The feller has barely sat down in his new chair, at least pretend to give him a chance.

So for example if say Russia declared war on The UK a few weeks after Starmer became PM, would you expect him not to respond with the excuse that he is new to the job ?

The son of a tool maker likes to boast about how he sorted out the Labour Party after the Corbyn years, but he fails miserably when a real challenge comes before him.

Just like his assisant Rayner, he is pandering to certain sections of the population, and it's bloody obvious to all that have eyes to see. The man is divisive.


/

What do you want his response to be?

Are you seriously saying Starmer lacks the intelligence to work that out for himself ?

So far his response has had the opposite effect on what he intended it to be.

No I didn't say that or anything like that.

I asked you a question that you didn't answer.

I don't have to give an answer, i am not the PM.

If you want an answer drop Starmer a e mail. That's what he is being paid for, to sort out the bloody mess we are in.

All he has done so far is make it worse.

So he hasn't done enough you just don't know what he hasn't done?