Rioting in Britain

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: angelchemuel
a reply to: alldaylong

I love a bit of reverse psychology

Rainbows
Jane

Nick Lowles the left wing founder of Hope Not Hate has confirmed that it was indeed a false flag last night. The whole 100 protests that where supposed to take place was a hoax.

x.com...

Nick Lowles

en.wikipedia.org...

He doesn't say it was a false flag.

He says the list was a hoax by someone trying to stir up more unrest.

A false flag is an action that is meant to decieve.

A hoax is an action that is meant to decieve.

What's the difference ?

originally posted by: alldaylong
A false flag is an action that is meant to decieve.

A hoax is an action that is meant to decieve.

What's the difference ?

I was intrigued by the question so looked it up:

A false flag operation is an act committed with the intent of disguising the actual source of responsibility and pinning blame on another party.

en.wikipedia.org...

A hoax is a widely publicised falsehood so fashioned as to invite reflexive, unthinking acceptance by the greatest number of people of the most varied social identities and of the highest possible social pretensions to gull its victims into putting up the highest possible social currency in support of the hoax.

en.wikipedia.org...

Overall, I think we have a little bit of both at play to be honest but mostly the latter.

ETA: Just had to look up "gull" too for that context = "someone who is easily tricked or cheated". Yup!

a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The origin of the term " false flag " was when pirate ships would fly a false flag to decieve merchamt ships they where in fact friendly so they could get in close to plunder. Note the word " decieve "

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: angelchemuel
a reply to: alldaylong

I love a bit of reverse psychology

Rainbows
Jane

Nick Lowles the left wing founder of Hope Not Hate has confirmed that it was indeed a false flag last night. The whole 100 protests that where supposed to take place was a hoax.

x.com...

Nick Lowles

en.wikipedia.org...

He doesn't say it was a false flag.

He says the list was a hoax by someone trying to stir up more unrest.

A false flag is an action that is meant to decieve.

A hoax is an action that is meant to decieve.

What's the difference ?

False flags means the motive behind the attack was disguised. Often used in the context of government being responsible in order to justify some other action or law.

There is no suggestion from that tweet ( or whatever we are meant to call them now) that is the case.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: angelchemuel
a reply to: alldaylong

I love a bit of reverse psychology

Rainbows
Jane

Nick Lowles the left wing founder of Hope Not Hate has confirmed that it was indeed a false flag last night. The whole 100 protests that where supposed to take place was a hoax.

x.com...

Nick Lowles

en.wikipedia.org...

He doesn't say it was a false flag.

He says the list was a hoax by someone trying to stir up more unrest.

A false flag is an action that is meant to decieve.

A hoax is an action that is meant to decieve.

What's the difference ?

False flags means the motive behind the attack was disguised. Often used in the context of government being responsible in order to justify some other action or law.

There is no suggestion from that tweet ( or whatever we are meant to call them now) that is the case.

I use the term false flag in it's literal meaning. i.e. to deceive.

You can interpret whichever way you wish. My meaning i have made clear

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The origin of the term " false flag " was when pirate ships would fly a false flag to decieve merchamt ships they where in fact friendly so they could get in close to plunder. Note the word " decieve "

Umm...okay?



Note the words "intentional misrepresentation of someone's allegiance".

The term "false flag" originated in the 16th century as an expression meaning an intentional misrepresentation of someone's allegiance.

I can play this all day long, alldaylong.

As I said, there are clearly, to my eye at least, elements of both at work. With the former tactic being used by those orchestrating the spread of this targeted disinformation, like Robinson, as well as those who jumped on the band-wagon and faciliated that spread because it suited their own agendas to do so, such as Farage, Tate and Musk. Therefore,you may want to note the words "publicised" and "unthinking acceptance". One fed into the other.

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: angelchemuel
a reply to: alldaylong

I love a bit of reverse psychology

Rainbows
Jane

Nick Lowles the left wing founder of Hope Not Hate has confirmed that it was indeed a false flag last night. The whole 100 protests that where supposed to take place was a hoax.

x.com...

Nick Lowles

en.wikipedia.org...

He doesn't say it was a false flag.

He says the list was a hoax by someone trying to stir up more unrest.

A false flag is an action that is meant to decieve.

A hoax is an action that is meant to decieve.

What's the difference ?

False flags means the motive behind the attack was disguised. Often used in the context of government being responsible in order to justify some other action or law.

There is no suggestion from that tweet ( or whatever we are meant to call them now) that is the case.

I use the term false flag in it's literal meaning. i.e. to deceive.

You can interpret whichever way you wish. My meaning i have made clear

Yet you edited your post.

Not to worry, as long as everyone understands the list seems to have been yet more deliberate social media misinformation. Not a false flag as most people would interpret it.

a reply to: BedevereTheWise

Yet you edited your post.

Didn't want to upset you.

This story also finds Putin's "fingerprints" (though, admittedly, not in the place where I first pointed).

www.msn.com... &pc=U531&cvid=11d26e691d7f41fa82d1dc2a35bdfdcf&ei=8

originally posted by: DISRAELI2
This story also finds Putin's "fingerprints" (though, admittedly, not in the place where I first pointed).

www.msn.com... &pc=U531&cvid=11d26e691d7f41fa82d1dc2a35bdfdcf&ei=8

That's written entirely based upon opinion, no research, no sources, just one person's observations. They could be correct, but without putting in the actual investigation required, it's not contributing anything to our understanding beyond one person's "feelz".

originally posted by: NorthOS
a reply to: UKTruth

I think Andrew Tates parents are Christian.

Didn’t he convert to Islam?

LOL

For what it’s worth.

Correct.
I had to look that up.
Bottom line is he's wrong to focus on religion as is anyone else who does so - Muslim or Christian.
The problem is illegal immigration - and is a real problem, caused by our Govt.

The other angles, trying to blame individuals or whole swathes of people are simply peddled by dishonest brokers and they should be ignored - whether they are leaders, famous people, or forum posters.
They are simply society's bottom feeders.

a reply to: UKTruth

I agree.

The problem is uncontrolled immigration.

Most immigrants are just normal people looking for a better way of life, just like the rest of us.

The problem has been caused by our governments.

They need to own the blowback not fan the flames.

originally posted by: UKTruth
The problem is illegal immigration - and is a real problem, caused by our Govt.

Definately the policies of the last government have framed the dialect surrounding immigration, but so have the mass media.

The problem, demonstrably, is not "illegal immigration", the problem apparently is that a minority of the population believe it to be the source of their problems and have allowed themselves to be deceived that those opinions are shared by the majority or that their opinions somehow have greater weight when applied with violence. While many may have concerns about immigration or the current levels of immigrations, those concerns are not all based on underlying racism of the sort that we have seen expressed on the streets.

The murders of the three children was not related to immigration, a lie was created that it was committed by an immigrant and a false name was circulated.

The riots were described as being about immigration but the actions of the demonstrators were clearly grounded in racism combined with politically disinterested criminality and not, identifiably, immigration specifically. The immigration dialogue has been mainly online.

a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The problem, demonstrably, is not "illegal immigration".....

In your opinion, others have a different opinion to you.
Now I know that might be a difficult thing for you to understand, appreciate and respect but its true nonetheless and their opinions have at least as much merit and worth as yours.

If its so apparent please show us, not with opinion but with facts etc.

a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

If the problem was illegal immigration the government would have stopped it, long ago as diminishing national resources would have dictated it. It has to be acknowledged by the majority of the British population just as the death rates from the jab were ignored which in non clown world would have been a national disgrace, the fact must be accepted these people have been noticed not to be refugees with their wives and children, but of military age with a disciplined bearing , all living together as brother officers on two year contracts and according to O looney who says that his information is from multiple sources that they will be used in the next lockdown to pacify unrest as all the British troops will be in the meat grinder in Ukraine.

If this is indeed a fact , then it would be unbelievable to the average brit , and therefore a valid tool in asymmetrical warfare. www.bitchute.com...

Why??? because a war with Russia will have to have the countries of the West in the same disciplined controlled state as the enemy, in the minds of the people planning this war the present state of these nations will need a tune up on par with North Korea. With no free loaders useless eaters and malingerers.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: yuppa

Sounds like what you are saying is the children of immigrants are somehow dangerous or to be watched.

That does not sound racist at all.

Possibly worth considering the piece of s@it in question may have had serious mental health issues which most likely contributed to him committing the sad act of depravity rather than the boys heritage.

I could not care ether way.

People who commit sad acts of depravity like that need to be removed from the gene pool.

Not because of where they came from but because of what they did and the danger they present.

There are no races but the human one so I dont see what youre on about.The boy wasnt born in england he was 7 when they moved in. It is a fact that if the parents had never came he would likely had not killed a BRITISH person who was born there.

a reply to: annonentity

Still pushing these fantasies I see.
Not taking me up on the bet?

UK troops aren't going to fight in Ukraine.

I don't know where you heard this but the vast majority of these illegal immigrants look nothing like trained military capable of controlling the British public.

As rigel intimated earlier; I'm sure if you flesh it out a bit a publisher may be interested in this fiction.

a reply to: yuppa

The boy wasnt born in england he was 7 when they moved

If only there was stricter border controls between Wales and England.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise
a reply to: yuppa

The boy wasnt born in england he was 7 when they moved

If only there was stricter border controls between Wales and England.

the left leaning party is covering up the boys true nationality.

a reply to: BrucellaOrchitis

The riots, were not about the horrific attack against children and they were not even about immigration, and no amount of narrative switching can turn that around. It was about people believing the lies that are being fed to them and that they keep eating up.

Sounds familiar. Unfortunately, I think we're all sociological vampires unable to see the reflection of like tendencies.

Addressing that, means identifying why these people are so susceptible and what makes them vulnerable to on-line influencers and addressing how that can be countered.

With one of these two things?

Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future

Carrington Event