In todays news...

[Mr. Dazzle]

Thought crime is now an arrestable offence. Think about that...

I'm not falling for that again!

It's not BTW*. You can think what you like, you just can't necessarily act on it. The law's always been like that.

*double BTW, it's actually 'crimethink' in 1984. Key part of the story is how newspeak removes words from the vocab to make expressing dissent literally impossible, which seems the opposite of what we have now

Define "Islamophobia".

Not really sure what you're driving at.

You seem to be suggesting mass censorship of a radical Islam attack? When in reality there's no evidence that occurred and seemingly some statements that the attacker explicitly isn't Muslim?

There wqs certainly a big instance of fake news spreading on social media claiming the attack was perpetrated by a Muslim. Maybe that's where this whole Islamophobia thing is coming from?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/c ... 94042.html

I personally don't recall ever having my thoughts policed.

You're gonna have to explain slowly how operation early dawn proves government plans regarding Thoughtcrime. Have people been locked up for thinking now? I thought it was for setting fire to stuff and looting.

[Treadeager]

World population and Massive immigration may not be at all problematical to some . It clearly is to a lot of people . Councils have been concealing the high costs of housing asylum seekers because it is " sensitive " . Some companies are making literally millions from short term housing . Meanwhile UK infrastructure is creaking at the seams . Much of the argument is about economic migration, not massive ( non-white ) immigration. Just my 2p worth .

[Screwdriver]

I'm not falling for that again!

It's not BTW*. You can think what you like, you just can't necessarily act on it. The law's always been like that.

*double BTW, it's actually 'crimethink' in 1984. Key part of the story is how newspeak removes words from the vocab to make expressing dissent literally impossible, which seems the opposite of what we have now

Define "Islamophobia".

Not really sure what you're driving at.

You seem to be suggesting mass censorship of a radical Islam attack? When in reality there's no evidence that occurred and seemingly some statements that the attacker explicitly isn't Muslim?

There wqs certainly a big instance of fake news spreading on social media claiming the attack was perpetrated by a Muslim. Maybe that's where this whole Islamophobia thing is coming from?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/c ... 94042.html

I personally don't recall ever having my thoughts policed.

You're gonna have to explain slowly how operation early dawn proves government plans regarding Thoughtcrime. Have people been locked up for thinking now? I thought it was for setting fire to stuff and looting.

Yeah ok fair point, I have been addressing multiple points simultaneously.

So: thought crime and Islamophobia.

Ignore the proposition that the horrific and savage murder of innocent children was either terrorism, radical Islamism or racially motivated. We do not know and most likely will never know. There is, as I have suggested, a valid argument to be made that such inflammatory factual information should be withheld from public view. I do not subscribe to that argument but we digress.

The Labour party are currently proposing that Islamophobia is a form of racism. An idiotic premise since neither islamism nor "Muslimism" is a racial type. However, such a definition does make "Islamophobia" a crime if conflated with existing laws against espousing racist ideologies.

Not only that but they have also accepted the Muslim council of Britain (!) definition of islamophobia. That forbids for example criticising the absurd dress code that this religion imposes on women. Forbids criticism of misogynistic behaviour (does that include wife beating??).

TBH you can see this shit for yourself. I don't know how it affects our current laws on child mutilation or how far our Labour leaders will bend the knee to Sharia law but it is a slippery slope to the Uk becoming an Islamic state. Once an area becomes controlled by a Muslim council, we don't ever get it back. It is a one way ticket back into the dark ages if you ask me.

[Mr. Dazzle]

World population and Massive immigration may not be at all problematical to some . It clearly is to a lot of people . Councils have been concealing the high costs of housing asylum seekers because it is " sensitive " . Some companies are making literally millions from short term housing . Meanwhile UK infrastructure is creaking at the seams . Much of the argument is about economic migration, not massive ( non-white ) immigration. Just my 2p worth .

The UK is creaking because of multi decade periods of under investment in public infrastructure and services*, aging and less healthy populations and a ever increasing expectation of what a good standard of living is.

Asylum seekers are just the cherry on top it's easy to point at.

*this is also why immigration is high. Way cheaper to import labour in the short term than to cultivate it at home

[Treadeager]

@Mr. Dazzle We have been importing labour since the 1950s. to my knowledge .What do you reckon is meant by " short term ? " . Like any other " Ponzi " scheme , doomed to ultimate failure ?

[Dodgy69]

When the cake is sinking, the last thing it needs is more cherry's and associated costs.

[Horse]

... black youth ... white children

How is that important?

Colour is immaterial

So why mention it?

[MyLittleStudPony]

World population and Massive immigration may not be at all problematical to some . It clearly is to a lot of people . Councils have been concealing the high costs of housing asylum seekers because it is " sensitive " . Some companies are making literally millions from short term housing . Meanwhile UK infrastructure is creaking at the seams . Much of the argument is about economic migration, not massive ( non-white ) immigration. Just my 2p worth .

The UK is creaking because of multi decade periods of under investment in public infrastructure and services*, aging and less healthy populations and a ever increasing expectation of what a good standard of living is.

Asylum seekers are just the cherry on top it's easy to point at.

*this is also why immigration is high. Way cheaper to import labour in the short term than to cultivate it at home

When the cake is sinking, the last thing it needs is more cherry's and associated costs.

Immigrants are net contributors. Better to get rid of the toxic elderly.

[demographic]

Odd that there I can't remember any riots and people attacking churches after the Dunblaine attack and when Derick Bird went on a shooting spree (one of my sisters was about very close to where that happened that day) but as soon as its a considered a forriner it's all "Imigrants, different culture" and people lining up for the hate minute.
Why do we think that is? Seems that some people are just looking for an excuse to attack people who they see as being different to me.

Like I said though, it's been interesting to see the amount of people in Carlisle who ttotally reject that kind of prejudice and were prepared to ruin the day of a group of racists who were supposed to be bused in to cause trouble in their community.
Personally I feel that Tommy Robinson and Farage have overplayed their hands and exposed their supporters motives. That is the small thing out of all this shite that amuses me.
Well that and some possible tax issues that has been brought to light about them.

[Screwdriver]

How is that important?

Colour is immaterial

So why mention it?

Because you cherry picked one factual element from my précis of the event and then ask why the item you chose to highlight was "important".

It was clearly important to you. I assume you are obsessed with that aspect since you want to reflect your decision as if I was being "racist" by singling it out for attention when the fact is, it is you.

But thanks for editing my actual comments to single words to try and prove your point. You have achieved the opposite.

[Screwdriver]

Immigrants are net contributors. Better to get rid of the toxic elderly.

This is true.

Problem is, the type of society they are "contributing" to is not the same as the one they came here to inhabit.

In an ideal world of course we would exterminate the useless elderly. According to ONS statistics, the indigenous population of the UK will be outbred by immigrants within the next ten years. Maybe we should just finish off all the elderly now and formally hand the country over to the caliphate.

Why drag it out?

[Cousin Jack]

Some truth in all the above, mixed in with a lot of tosh.

Western Europe has a good standard of living compared with most of Africa and the Middle East. People in eg Africa desire this standard of living. That is human nature.

The UK is seen as the easiest place to get this, for all sorts of reasons, benefits, no ID cards, language, etc.

We need to control immigration for several reasons, some short term, some long term.

Small island, too many people, inadequate infrastructure, and no money to rebuild
it. Or even time at the current rates.

Too rapid influx of alien culture without time to assimilate will lead to a backlash,the Tommy Robinson effect. Visible difference, eg skin colour or cultural symbols exacerbate this.

Solution Fcuk knows, I don't. If something doesn't change the longer term looks bleak.

[Horse]

Colour is immaterial

So why mention it?

Because you cherry picked one factual element from my précis of the event and then ask why the item you chose to highlight was "important".

It was clearly important to you. I assume you are obsessed with that aspect since you want to reflect your decision as if I was being "racist" by singling it out for attention when the fact is, it is you.

Yes, it's all about me Great assumption ...


You often go to great lengths to remind us how you are right about things

And here you are factually correct. Then you say it's irrelevant.

As you say, it's as if, in your original post, you were being racist.

But thanks for editing my actual comments to single words to try and prove your point. You have achieved the opposite.

Editing? Yes, I removed reams of text. But it's irrelevant.

[Dodgy69]

Immigrants are net contributors. Better to get rid of the toxic elderly.

This is true.

Problem is, the type of society they are "contributing" to is not the same as the one they came here to inhabit.

In an ideal world of course we would exterminate the useless elderly. According to ONS statistics, the indigenous population of the UK will be outbred by immigrants within the next ten years. Maybe we should just finish off all the elderly now and formally hand the country over to the caliphate.

Why drag it out?

"Net contributors", I wonder if this includes moving and housing arriving immigrants, paying their expenses, paying France to police their borders very poorly, RNLI costs, medical costs due to their health, physically and mentally. Millions everyday so we're told.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Yes, that's what "net" means.

What proportion of immigrants do you think arrived here on a small boat?

[demographic]

So what criterion are we using to decide if immigrants are productive?
Lots of them in the care industry round here. Y'know looking after yer nan and so on.
The NHS would fall apart without them and its pretty close anyway. How would you all cope without that?

Are we holding ourselves to the same standards and maybe we need to post a few details about our jobs so other people can decide how productive we are.
So... what do you lot do for a living anyway?
demographic: Carpenter. Build schools, offices, museums, bridges and even a fucking drawbridge Mofos.
Pretty sure a casualty doctor trumps my job, what about yours?

[Dodgy69]

I'm not sure "net" does mean that. I'd imagine most right thinking sorts agree we need support in many industries from overseas workers, same folk must agree we don't need all these small boat arrivals.

If a need for workers, due to growth, puts our housing and infrastructures in shit street, a nation will decline. House building has been maxed out for a few year's now, to no affect.

[Treadeager]

Immigrants are net contributors. Better to get rid of the toxic elderly.
[/quote]

Regarding world population.. quite ( voluntary euthanasia already being mooted )

Next step compulsory castration for all males with more than 2.4 rugrats

[Screwdriver]

Yes, it's all about me Great assumption ...

You often go to great lengths to remind us how you are right about things

You are the only one here throwing the word "racist" around.

I do often return to those comments I have made which were dismissed as "conspiracy theory" or ridiculed when they are subsequently proved to have been correct. I appreciate that those who either argued against my observations or ignored them as "conspiracy" are embarrassed when they turn out to have been true. The point I make is not that I am "reminding you that I was right" but that people really ought to consider how and why they were so wrong.

And here you are factually correct. Then you say it's irrelevant.

As you say, it's as if, in your original post, you were being racist.

Editing? Yes, I removed reams of text. But it's irrelevant.

Well I reported this post to @weeksy because you are obviously manipulating my posts to get a rise out of me. This has no bearing on the topic nor is taking individual words out of context a "quote". I see your insult has received a "like" from the other mindless troll. That says it all.

I remind you while you are attempting to "score" some pathetic point in your own tiny mind, that this is a discussion regarding the despicable events at Southgate where several innocent children were hacked to death. It is difficult to discuss AT ALL with the extraordinary levels of censorship and the ignorant knee jerk reaction from the extreme right wing.

You picked the words "black and white" out of my reply to someone asking what had happened and then accuse me of being racist. I find that sort of cheap shot disgusting and beneath contempt so I am of course going to put you and your incessant ignorant jibes on ignore.

However before I do, it might be that you are not merely trolling for a response or being deliberately provocative, I think you might literally be too stupid to understand the logical progression of a discussion. Its as if there isn't enough room in your brain to hold onto a train of thought so you literally pick a couple of words out of a reply and argue your version of meaning from there. Whether that is a deliberate attempt at trolling or an indication you are a bit too dim to understand is irrelevant. It is disgusting behaviour, end of story.

I am in enough trouble with Weeksy as it is.

[weeksy]

Well I reported this post to @weeksy


I am in enough trouble with Weeksy as it is.

1. Yes and as per my message, i didn't feel it warranted anything in terms of moderation

2. No-one is in trouble.

Just because someone reports an 'issue' doesn't mean me or the Mods have to agree and sanction it, that's not how it works.

Put yourself in the scenario of 2 kids in a car "he said this...." "no he said that...." "no it was him who did this"

That's what i see the above reported post as, 2 kids bickering like children in the back of the car.

I've honestly got better things to do with my time

Enjoy guys.