| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Was just in response to Peters post, which I can see his point in tbh, but I wanted to point out that often these threads have a tone set early on based on general insults, mocking, claims the govt are the worst in history and other various examples of hyperbole.Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
I don't endlessly defend the govt by the way. I just consistently think those who do all the criticising on here rarely offer better ideas
You do endlessly defend the Government - as I mentioned, it’s a reflex action, so maybe you don’t know you’re doing it? You’ve not answered my question either, is it okay for the Government to talk about lefty lawyers, but not me?
In response to infantile posts about it being the worst govt in history / they should be liquidated and things like that, then yes I will naturally defend them. Would do the same for the Welsh Govt in the face of such ridiculousness.
In general though, no. But on this I do think their hands are largely tied (as will the future govts) and I do think my responses are more to highlight the lack of genuine solutions put forward elsewhere. But I guess we all see these things in different ways.
You can both talk about lefty lawyers if you like,that's up to you.
But that’s not what you said earlier when you included what I said in your “list of shame” - you correctly identified that I wasn’t being serious, yet had to add the words “but still”. Why?
Cos it still sets the tone for the debate, when some of the criticism of lawyers may be perfectly valid.
Nonetheless, this does seem a rather pedantic interjection. Should all language on here by analysed in such detail? Seems strange to pick up on 'but still' but overlook talk of people being scum etc
You are like a festering wart
Your ego is the size of a fridge
You are a parent ?
Jesus christ
So, it’s “perfectly valid” when people of the right political persuasion, as you see it, use the term and a “but still” when I do? You often try to moderate the threads you get involved in, but we’ve already got people who do that.
For goodness sake Bob. In response to Peter, I highlighted some of the comments on Page 1 of this thread to illustrate how the tone of debates is often set. I rightly pointed out what you wrote and said it was ironic.
Now if you are going to play language police may I suggest you start speaking out about the person who has posted immediately above you?
You don't like that someone wrote 'but still..' imagine waking up to see someone call you a festering wart, question your parenting etc, all because you don't vote for his political party.
You could actually help to cut out the kind of personal abuse that is common on here and usually starts from a small number of people.
Why don't you do that and call him out instead of nitpicking?
Your implication was clear, I shouldn’t be saying what I did. If and when a moderator tells me I’ve gone too far, I’ll accept it (probably), not when you do. I’d say it’s the people who use the term “lefty lawyers” to describe someone who takes a case which succeeds in the courts who have the problem, not.me.
You can say what you like Bob! I was just quoting you and did the fair thing of mentioning you mentioned it ironically. Was hardly unreasonable on my behalf.Your implication was clear, I shouldn’t be saying what I did. If and when a moderator tells me I’ve gone too far, I’ll accept it (probably
Now as I said, if you want to play language police, maybe you have something to say about the post just above your first one this morning? Or is that okay cos he shares similar views?
Maybe you should retract "lefty lawyers' first because it's infantile, entirely inaccurate, pandering to the worst in society and placing a section of solicitors in danger. This government is self-serving and evil; even though you broadly support their ethos it doesn't mean you can't call them out.
I take your point, but as I said. Look who started talking about them first, and I don't think it is entirely inaccurate, even if the phrase is, I agree, infantile.
Otherwise I think ur also kinda making my point really. Upset over the term 'lefty lawyer' but happy to throw the word evil around. There are evil people in the world, probably evil govts, but they aren't ours. Such language is also infantile and dangerous. Aside from anything else, I doubt so many people would want to come here if we genuinely did have an evil govt. Rishi Sunak isn't Skelator!
I think you need to grow up a little. Evil is never infantile, it is ugly and harrowing. When it's justified it needs to be exposed. Maybe you should look inward and ask yourself why you are aligned to such unsavoury views, practices and people.
What are you going on about? How the hell is anything the UK has done remotely evil? Honestly, sometimes!
One could equally say being cool with what is going on is supporting evil, but I don't lay that charge at your door!
How the hell is feeding, housing and caring for whomever chooses to come here 'evil'?!
I don't think that's a good comparison at all.
Evil is dramatic yeah but also subjective and within the context of how the UK has throughout its history treated migrants and migration, this government is an outlier in its rhetoric against migrants, Lee Anderson's recent comments show that off. What makes it worse is that the majority of them aren't pushing that narrative because they believe it, but because they believe it can hold/gain electoral ground. If the bar you are measuring the UK by is North Korea or the Taliban then you probably should be aiming for a better standard.
The phrase 'Lefty Lawyers' is different imo. It has one target in its sights and that is the justice system, which it seeks to undermine and which is crucial and core to UK democracy. It pushes the idea that somebody can manipulate the system to suit their beliefs rather than the truth which is lawyers will find mistakes and hold people, in this case the government, to account for them. In short, it would be more convenient to the government if migrants weren't entitled to due process and a fair hearing of their application but that isn't the case.
I think those are some strong rose-tinted glasses if you think the UK has never done anything that could be considered evil.
He just doesn’t get it, I remember him holding his hands up in horror when it was suggested that the UK Government were ticking about eight of twelve boxes that were used in a definition of fascism. He seems to think you need a dodgy moustache and haircut and one testicle to qualify as showing fascist tendencies. Remember how the Republican demonstrators were treated on the King’s Coronation Day? Demonstrating is now banned, or it is at least if it’s about something the Government is against, but when it’s against ULEZ, like it was a few days ago, the authorities didn’t bat an eyelid.
As I said, the Government ticks a few of the boxes when it comes to fascist behaviour. In much the same way, there are different types of evil - to, apparently, believe this Government has done nothing evil strikes me as very naive. All Governments of whatever colour do things which are conspired evil by some.
Honestly sometimes this place seems like an alternative reality!
So I "I don't get it because I don't think we are living in some fascistic state with an evil govt?
Do you ever listen to yourself? Sounds like that character from the Young Ones.
A big clue here is that in genuine fascist states the people tend to flee from them rather than to them.
You must think these people or idiots? Or perhaps you are just being extremely hyperbolic and we aren't actually the state with fascist tendencies that you believe? Although I don't think for a second you do actually believe that anyway.
Now please tell me. What, in respect of the debate in question has the British govt done that is remotely evil?
Well off the top of my head our military relationship with Saudi is pretty evil considering what happened this week. Suella might have been taking notes on how effectively protect your borders though.
But I think the point bob is trying to make is that (forgive the cliche) it is a slippery slope.
I don't disagree on the arms sales issue but that is an incredibly complex industry and by definition that makes the UK govt in Iraq more evil and as Dorcus insinuated earlier, does that make anyone who supported them evil?
So again, in the context of the topic of this thread, what the hell has the govt done that is evil?
Housed and fed every last person that has landed? Given due legal process to them all? Ensured they weren't at risk of legionella?
If you think this is how fascism starts, I have a few books to lend out, cos as I will point out, people tend to flee from fascist or fascist sympathetic states not to them. So either the people are mad or using words like evil and fascist is just some culture war stuff to stir things up?
When I say 'you' I mean 'one' really.
Greed and selfishness are the roots of all evil. Do you really not possess even a basic idea of ethics? I think you've suffered a misspent youth.
Living proof of the validity of that line about hear no evil, see no evil etc.
I knew my response would draw a self righteous rant from you, it’s what you do when someone suggests something that you don’t seem to be able to comprehend.
As Eric said, we’re clearly not living in a time of goose stepping, holocaust causing dictatorship, but, as I’ve mentioned before on here, we’re in a time when it’s become easier to see how people were taken in by fascism in the 1930s.
You ask about examples of evil, well, let’s start with the thread title. Sticking homeless people on a barge so it’s twice as full as what should be its capacity, making a point of emphasising how “basic” the accommodation will be and then ignoring advice from the medical profession that the conditions on the barge will be a health risk is a good place to start. Second, you clearly think the Rwanda policy is not evil, there are those who disagree with you. Thirdly, I cannot even begin to comprehend a mind set that orders that cartoons be painted over at a centre where refugee children are housed.
This is a Government that it’s generally accepted caused deaths with their cuts to benefits to the disabled around a decade ago, we are a country where the gap between richest and poorest has grown substantially during its time in power and where life expectancy was falling in the years before the pandemic. I took care to say that Governments of all colours do some things that could be considered evil (Blair’s line on weapons of mass destruction for example), but this lot have done more than most.
By the way I entirely agree the UK government's actions involving the "dodgy dossier" was pure evil. That was instigated by a right wing religious nutjob who wished to appease his US puppet masters. Evil comes in all shapes, sizes and colours.
I opposed the policy vehemently as did most of the European political corpus.
Self righteous rant? Hardly. It's called defending myself and holding you to account for hysterical claims of imminent fascism, which again you don't seem to understand that if your portrayal is right then no one would be arriving here. But you arent right. The UK is not some imminent fascist state or remotely close to it. If you actually cared for such matters you would speak out against people like Sludge who in the last month has said "Tories should be scared" and "Liquidated". Pretty certain you were kinda cool with a democratic vote being overiden when it suited too, so not sure you are best places to judge. But you don't really care do you? It's about the 'threat' of fascism and how only your thinking can prevent it. No different to the clowns who claimed Corbyn was a threat of communism.
So again your example of "evil" is the UK assisting to shore, housing and feeding tens of thousands of people who want to live in this "evil" govts state? Your example of "evil" is a legionella test that meant everyone was moved off site to safer accommodation? And then you site a mural being painted over, which I agree seems unnecessary but it's not the norm to have such things at border controls anywhere. Your definition of "evil" sure is a pretty low bar.
Have you actually seen how refugees around the world live? Frequently in tented accommodation at or close to warzones where legions of soldiers are more of a concern than legionella.
You talk of accommodation as if we should have tens of thousands of warm empty flats waiting for everyone but how would that work? Do we keep them empty for years on while we wait? What about homeless people here?
Hasn't Labour committed to keeping the Bobby Stockholm? Does that make them "evil" and by definition, you too?
Or in fact is that a ridiculous, hyperbolic phrase used to try and comprehend am incredibly complex situation?
Honestly, the way you guys throw around the word fascism as if this is remotely comparable to how fascists have treated their victims, you should be ashamed.
Jewish people were not fleeing into 1930s Germany. To compare the two situations is as preposterous as claiming that acting on a legionella outbreak is evil.
Get back in the real world!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote