All Lives Matter

[DeppityDawg]

But it seems to me that there is hypocrisy and bias in all positions, and especially in the positions of many white men who are posting rants about how terrible it is that a very small group of the huge numbers of demonstrators broke a statue, but, as soon as white right wing thugs start attacking the police and urinating on memorials, turning up drunk at 9 in the morning looking for trouble, the first post is more of an "oh it's no big deal it will just be the media bigging things up".

Am I supposed to see no difference there?  This to me is a symptom of the fact that we live in a disriminatory society where everyone believes 100% that they are not racist, but their attitudes towards other minority groups are ever so slightly different to their attitude to the people that they identify with i.e. white people.  When you add up the impact of all those unintentional every so slight differences, you have the societies we live in globally today.

I've already posted in the past on other threads that this is the same the other way around in countries where the majority are black, or muslim, or whatever - I have witnessed real discrimination against whites in at least one of those countries.

Can anyone come up with a concrete, real, provable example of discrimination against white men?  I don't consider organisations that are attempting to recruit more BAME people in order to bring the proportion up to something a bit close to their % in the population as that's a correction rather than a discrimination.

Any white men here who have been subject to racist abuse by other groups in this country?

Also for the record, I don't approve of violence by any protesters no matter what the cause, and I didn't agree with any violence against the police by BLM protesters.  As I understand it the case where the police officer was thrown off her horse is disputed that it was the result of an attack by protesters.

Another whining post full of distortions and things that were never said. A pile of putrid, handwringing shit from someone who thinks that because he's lived a life of privilege that everyone else has too, and should therefore think like he does. You haven't got a clue what you are talking about, you've little real life experience and your whole view is based on numbers and "data", by your own admission you don't understand what life with less opportunity looks like, and I doubt you've ever been near a violent protest in your life. Yet none of this ever stops you lecturing everyone else about what "should" be. You constantly attribute motives to others seemingly out of thin air. You're just dying to accuse people of racism or some other pejorative, so just fecking do it.

I'm totally done with you Javert - its just a complete waste of time attempting any conversation with you, and I won't waste another second of my time on any of your posts. I suggest you do the same with mine.

[cromwell]

The "Urinator" has given himself up.

If I were a solicitor I'd be happy to defend him. He wasn't peeing on the plaque, he was tucked away up the side, where is the nearest open public toilet, etc.

amazed you'd be happy to defend him,the embankment is a few hundred yards away so pretty sure there'd be somewhere more suitable.
I've been caught short  on occasion and always managed to find somewhere discreet to relieve myself but still felt a bit guilty.
When you say he peed at the side he'd have to be blind not to see it was a memorial,anyway a totally drunk alcoholic peed at the side of the cenotaph in Manchester abused the arresting officers and spat at one of the custody staff,he got two years.

[papasmurf]

If I were a solicitor I'd be happy to defend him. He wasn't peeing on the plaque, he was tucked away up the side, where is the nearest open public toilet, etc.

Those thoughts had crossed my mind.

[Barry]

The "Urinator" has given himself up.

If I were a solicitor I'd be happy to defend him. He wasn't peeing on the plaque, he was tucked away up the side, where is the nearest open public toilet, etc.

[Thomas]

There is no such thing as public opinion as a single blob

There is javert , but it doesnt matter as we have seen over the last four years or so , because if the public by a majority take part in something like an election or referendum , cast a vote , and the majority vote against your wishes , you wont accept it anyway.

On the other hand you luvvies seem to take it as a given that public opinion is on your side ( wether you ask for it or not)when pulling down and disrespecting statues.

Cake and eat it springs to mind everytime i read one of your posts .

[papasmurf]

From what I could see, the people in the OP were all may closer than 2m from each other - so they might be good at defending war memorials but they don't appear to be very good at social distancing from that photo.

So were the protesters and the far tight thugs. So your point is what?

[Borg Refinery]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/one-third-of-whites-claim-they-are-victims-of-racism-6908299.html%3famp

[Javert]

Well I learned something useful today, which is that bikers and ex forces folk are immune to Coronavirus.

They are so lucky being so tough that they can ignore social distancing in their heroic defence.

Where did you learn that? Anyone at those demos increases the likelihood of a spike in Covid-19.

From what I could see, the people in the OP were all may closer than 2m from each other - so they might be good at defending war memorials but they don't appear to be very good at social distancing from that photo.

[Javert]

Meanwhile there protesters in London who were supposedly there to protect the statues against a Black Lives Matter protest that was cancelled, are now attacking the police and one has been pictured urinating on the memorial to a police officer who died in the line of duty.

Others are attacking journalists (after inspecting their papers to see if they work for an "approved" newspaper like the Sun or the Telegraph) - this is no doubt all in the name of the protection of our long cherished freedoms!

Black Lives Matter protests with many times more people today have been almost entirely peaceful.

Aye. Entirely peaceful. You seem to want to make it sound as if it is only "far right extremists" who fight with the Police?

Were you this observant last week about who was doing what when a load of "peaceful" BLM protestors injured dozens of coppers and caused one WPC's horse to bolt leaving her with a lung punctured and half her ribs broken?

I'm willing to bet that the number of people on the BLM side who became violent was a lot lower % of the total number attending, than on the other side.  I can't prove it without data, but, I would be very surprised if it's the other way around.

It's not surprising though that you spring up to defend extreme far right protesters with all sorts of implied excuses whilst BLM protesters are automatically all violent thugs until proved otherwise.

This also showed up in the language of the Prime Minister's comments and the implications of the exact words used - the implication was that the right wing protesters and statue defenders are all lovely people and only a few small thugs ruined it, whilst on the other side his tweets from 2 days before implied that all BLM protesters should be considered as violent thugs until proved otherwise.

If you like at the overhead aerial footage of various events from yesterday, you can see otherwise.

I'm not sure DD was defending anyone, rather highlighting your hypocrisy.

I guess percentages can always be used to back an argument poorly especially if there's many more on one side than the other.

But it seems to me that there is hypocrisy and bias in all positions, and especially in the positions of many white men who are posting rants about how terrible it is that a very small group of the huge numbers of demonstrators broke a statue, but, as soon as white right wing thugs start attacking the police and urinating on memorials, turning up drunk at 9 in the morning looking for trouble, the first post is more of an "oh it's no big deal it will just be the media bigging things up".

Am I supposed to see no difference there?  This to me is a symptom of the fact that we live in a disriminatory society where everyone believes 100% that they are not racist, but their attitudes towards other minority groups are ever so slightly different to their attitude to the people that they identify with i.e. white people.  When you add up the impact of all those unintentional every so slight differences, you have the societies we live in globally today.

I've already posted in the past on other threads that this is the same the other way around in countries where the majority are black, or muslim, or whatever - I have witnessed real discrimination against whites in at least one of those countries.

Can anyone come up with a concrete, real, provable example of discrimination against white men?  I don't consider organisations that are attempting to recruit more BAME people in order to bring the proportion up to something a bit close to their % in the population as that's a correction rather than a discrimination.

Any white men here who have been subject to racist abuse by other groups in this country?

Also for the record, I don't approve of violence by any protesters no matter what the cause, and I didn't agree with any violence against the police by BLM protesters.  As I understand it the case where the police officer was thrown off her horse is disputed that it was the result of an attack by protesters.

[Borg Refinery]

1) If you didn't go there as part of that idiotic TR group the football lads alliance (who I was referring to) or Britain Last then you aren't one of them are you?

The FLA has/had  nothing to do with TR though he has in the past turned up as part of the crowd which the press take as ,well im not sure what they take from it but they have obviously fed you the opinion that its his group which couldn't be further from the truth . In fact the FLA disbanded after far right wing infiltration last year .

I read that the 'democratic football lads alliance' had attempted to come to that day and the day's demos before.


They had planned to be there.


And that IIRC was from the Torygraph too..why would they bother lying about it?


Like I said, if ex forces and bikery folk and others (such as yourself) wanna turn up to stand and protect the statues peacefully then that's good, I appreciate it for what it's worth, but don't tell me there were none of the thuggish types there - I've seen clear as day evidence of it, not just aerially but on the lines too - and they started it with the police, not the other way round. They may well be agent provocateurs paid hy someone, I'm not saying they're not - Russia and many others are very proactive at the moment in both left and right wing groups.


But maybe in future, when you insinuate that peaceful protesters who are 'lefties' had something to do with the riots, you will recall that the media framed you guys up in exactly the same way..?

[DeppityDawg]

It's not surprising though that you spring up to defend extreme far right protesters with all sorts of implied excuses whilst BLM protesters are automatically all violent thugs until proved otherwise.

Feck off you self righteous tosser. I defended nothing, I just asked what you had to say about the violence displayed by "protestors" last week

Yet again you remanufacture what someone wrote and change it into something completely different, and then you wonder why people get so fecking pissed off with you

[papasmurf]

Well I learned something useful today, which is that bikers and ex forces folk are immune to Coronavirus.

They are so lucky being so tough that they can ignore social distancing in their heroic defence.

Where did you learn that? Anyone at those demos increases the likelihood of a spike in Covid-19.

[Streetwalker]

1) If you didn't go there as part of that idiotic TR group the football lads alliance (who I was referring to) or Britain Last then you aren't one of them are you?

The FLA has/had  nothing to do with TR though he has in the past turned up as part of the crowd which the press take as ,well im not sure what they take from it but they have obviously fed you the opinion that its his group which couldn't be further from the truth . In fact the FLA disbanded after far right wing infiltration last year .

[GregB]

Meanwhile there protesters in London who were supposedly there to protect the statues against a Black Lives Matter protest that was cancelled, are now attacking the police and one has been pictured urinating on the memorial to a police officer who died in the line of duty.

Others are attacking journalists (after inspecting their papers to see if they work for an "approved" newspaper like the Sun or the Telegraph) - this is no doubt all in the name of the protection of our long cherished freedoms!

Black Lives Matter protests with many times more people today have been almost entirely peaceful.

Aye. Entirely peaceful. You seem to want to make it sound as if it is only "far right extremists" who fight with the Police?

Were you this observant last week about who was doing what when a load of "peaceful" BLM protestors injured dozens of coppers and caused one WPC's horse to bolt leaving her with a lung punctured and half her ribs broken?

I'm willing to bet that the number of people on the BLM side who became violent was a lot lower % of the total number attending, than on the other side.  I can't prove it without data, but, I would be very surprised if it's the other way around.

It's not surprising though that you spring up to defend extreme far right protesters with all sorts of implied excuses whilst BLM protesters are automatically all violent thugs until proved otherwise.

This also showed up in the language of the Prime Minister's comments and the implications of the exact words used - the implication was that the right wing protesters and statue defenders are all lovely people and only a few small thugs ruined it, whilst on the other side his tweets from 2 days before implied that all BLM protesters should be considered as violent thugs until proved otherwise.

If you like at the overhead aerial footage of various events from yesterday, you can see otherwise.

I'm not sure DD was defending anyone, rather highlighting your hypocrisy.

I guess percentages can always be used to back an argument poorly especially if there's many more on one side than the other.

[papasmurf]

It's not surprising though that you spring up to defend extreme far right protesters with all sorts of implied excuses whilst BLM protesters are automatically all violent thugs until proved otherwise.

Who is "springing to their defence?"