Ok, I’ll be offensive by posting this little gem which contains foul language and views likely to upset any ‘woke’ within audible range.
I just get that awful feeling our lords and masters in the HoC and Upper House are totally oblivious to the anger amongst the great unwashed electorate, first evident in the Brexit referendum and then in December 2019.
If they continue on the present complacent vein then there might just be violence ‘twixt the Left and those who are not Left in ambition and opinion.
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2020 6:13 pm
by Boac
BM - do you think we have any 'woke' audience here?
BM - do you think we have any 'woke' audience here?
One never knows if spouses/partners/lovers/mistresses/parents (less likely!) of O-N members, a word I use with caution, might just be listening when the hapless O-N member plays the vid...
They may not share our desire for free and unencumbered speech and I know that anyone employed by the UK NHS of 21st Century has possibly been successfully brainwashed well into fully qualified ‘woke’ mode.
I must now go and search for something to offend me as part of my homework assigned as essential for my Diversity Awareness course.
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2020 7:24 pm
by barkingmad
Shock Horror ! Someone agrees with what the Chump has to say on at least one topic;
Quick Ethel, fetch the smelling salts, I’m feeling quite odd...!
You are odd, but not much odder than most who post here...
– the totalitarian thirst for ‘driving people from their jobs, shaming dissenters, and demanding total submission from anyone who disagrees’.
Pot, kettle comes to mind...
Alexander Vindman, a lieutenant colonel and national security aide who played a central role in Donald Trump’s impeachment case, announced on Wednesday that he will retire from the army, issuing a scathing statement that accused the president of running a “campaign of bullying, intimidation and retaliation” against him.
The statement from attorney David Pressman said Vindman was leaving the army after more than 21 years in the military after it had been made clear “that his future within the institution he has dutifully served will forever be limited.
“Through a campaign of bullying, intimidation, and retaliation, the president of the United States attempted to force LTC Vindman to choose: between adhering to the law or pleasing a president. Between honoring his oath or protecting his career. Between protecting his promotion or the promotion of his fellow soldiers,” read the statement
I suppose some here might appreciate the irony of a video entitled...
shutup.JPG (18.13 KiB) Viewed 599 times
"Shutup" on a thread that bleats about "The Price of Free Speech"...
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:44 am
by Boac
As with many folk, TGG, it is the 'Free Speech' I want to hear, but the stuff I don't want to hear suppressed. That's what 'Free Speech' is.
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:48 am
by Rwy in Sight
It would save a lot of harm Boac if we agree on your statement.
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 11:46 am
by Capetonian
Better learn the new wokabulary – cancel culture just ruined Scrabble
When virtue signalling is the top-scoring term of the day, we’ve stopped progressing and started regressing
It was only a matter of time until Scrabble was branded “offensive”. The most priggish board game in history does involve words, after all – and right now words are more loaded and dangerous than an AR-15.
A complete cancellation of the elements of speech and writing that have allowed us to communicate and evolve since circa 3,400BC seems to be the endgame. And with estate agents now banned from using the term “master bedroom”, “manholes” generally agreed to be sexist, and even the word “woman” considered problematic (just ask JK Rowling), it might be easier to do away with words altogether.
We could then return to the use of hieroglyphics (or emoji, as they’re now called), and reduce every human expression and emotion to either a flamenco-dancing woman or a sad face. But if we’re ever to reach that zenith of civilisation, we’re going to have to gradually erode our language...
As with many folk, TGG, it is the 'Free Speech' I want to hear, but the stuff I don't want to hear suppressed. That's what 'Free Speech' is.
Succinctly and accurately stated sir!
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 12:31 pm
by Bob
Whilst not being an Arry and Meg fan, who the **** is that twat bleating on youtube? and why the **** does anyone think posting his crap to a forum has any **** point? ...
.. I mean FFS---OMG and *****
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 12:48 pm
by Boac
The scope, Bob, for unbounded numbers of 'Talking Heads' to spout all sort of opinions and rubbish via You-Tube and w.h.y. is vast at the moment.
Whilst not being an Arry and Meg fan, who the *f*ck* is that twat bleating on youtube? and why the *f*ck* does anyone think posting his crap to a forum has any f*cking point? ...
.. I mean FFS---OMG and *sh*t*
Bob you are on form today..
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2020 12:36 pm
by AtomKraft
This stifling of free speech is much more dangerous than it appears.
My advice is, speak out while you can.
If you don't, you soon won't be able to.
Also, when words fail, violence and war will fill the resultant space.
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2020 4:42 pm
by boing
If the protests had been limited to mass demonstrations, no matter how long they had continued, they would have had positive effects because they tap in on a general feeling that the police can, in fact, be overly oppressive. However, the looting gave the impression that some people were more interested in taking advantage of the chaos rather than supporting the cause and the illegal "occupations" and disruption lost sympathy because they frightened the average thinking person.
We therefore have a problem. The politicians are now starting appreciate the forces they released but they can't get the Genie back into the bottle. They can reverse themselves and appear weak or they can double up on their errors to appear strong, some will relish the chaos they created because this is what they wanted all along not remembering that revolutions usually eat their creators. The initial protests have lost impact because they have been eclipsed by the violence and the violent are doing harm to the cause by demonstrating to the average man that "their" violence is far worse than "police" violence.
The average man now has sympathy for the police because lack of support for law enforcement from community leaders is absolutely obvious. The bulk of the population and the police are now natural although unexpected allies. We can expect community leaders to become increasingly isolated because they have lost the respect of the population and the police and any actions they take to control the mob will be seen as lack of support by the mob. These arrogant dicks are in a bad position and they are realizing this too late.
The crunch comes when the only restraint on the population taking control of the mob themselves is removed, that is when the police have finally had enough and they walk away from the job. Apres moi le deluge. A very convenient solution for the politicians as they can then fulminate, grab news time and let someone else do their dirty work.
.
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:42 am
by llondel
To me, the issue with the police is one of accountability. In the UK they do at least attempt to have an independent complaints procedure, and a police force will refer itself occasionally after an incident, presumably because they consider they did nothing wrong and would like confirmation of it. I saw one recently where a force referred itself because a car crashed and there happened to be a police vehicle nearby and I assume they wanted to show that the police vehicle was not involved in any way with the crash.
US police appear to have no checks or balances, so while many of them do a good job, there exists a bunch of thugs who get away literally with murder because they are never held responsible for their actions and the default action is to support whatever the officers on the ground said. That is what needs to change. If you shoot someone in the line of duty then you need to be able to justify that to an independent investigator. Just a change to a neutral "something happened, the officer concerned is on other duties while we establish the facts" is safer all round, and saves having to make an embarrassing climb-down later when the incriminating video surfaces. Then call in someone from another police department to investigate honestly. It ultimately works in the favour of the police because people will see that most of them had good reason to act the way they did and the ones who clearly went OTT are appropriately disciplined. One hopes that the incidence of OTT actions would diminish once it was clear that there are unpleasant consequences.
Re: The Price of Free Speech : Unaffordable?
Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2020 4:03 am
by PHXPhlyer
That is standard procedure here. OIS (Officer Involved Shooting) is always investigated by another department.
That is standard procedure here. OIS (Officer Involved Shooting) is always investigated by another department.
PP
Another department?...
same ***** here, the independent Police Complaints Commission tends to have top level staff who are ex...wait for it...wait for it...police officers
Corruption and cronyism once something the UK would proudly stand against is now the staple Mode of operation it's everywhere in the system and not by accident but by design
