 sj |
||
|
||
BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Apr 20 - 07:26 AM "You guys never learn." I've assuaged by guilt Baccie I hate cutting people out while all this shit is happening - I tried again and he "wants to be alone" Feck him - he really isn't worth helping It did give an opportunity to make points I didn't really have time to make, tanks to the sun shining - I friggin' hate gardening Jim |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Apr 20 - 08:08 AM Shortages of protective equipment have now reached panic level - the gowns desperately;y needed, "when and if they arrive from Turkey are not nearly enough to meet immediate needs" Elsewhere, countries begin to return to normal (other than the US, which is being "urged to return to normal by Trum despite not being ready to" Jim |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Apr 20 - 08:48 AM I can just see a bunch of worried Tories standing on the white cliffs of Dover, fretfully scanning the skies with their opera glasses for a sighting of a Turkish plane... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Rain Dog Date: 20 Apr 20 - 09:49 AM Unfortunately the cliffs are out of bounds at the moment. Closed while council workers try to capture the gulls and then paint them blue. It is for the good of the country you know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Apr 20 - 09:52 AM Blue birds - reminds me of the winter evenings in the fields surrounding our Kirkby housing estate We did our best to keep warm though Jim |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Iains Date: 20 Apr 20 - 10:12 AM Your rabid hatred of those who wish Britain to stay in Europe or those who would like to see a better life for the poor is palpable, your support for the rightist scvum that now pollutes British streets and your lack of concern that Rees Mogg, who fought to leave Europe and immediate moved his investments to Ireland, has opemly supported the Nazism that our fathers gave their lives to keep out, sums up you and thos who think like you
From: Jim Carroll - PM Date: 30 Aug 09 - 10:59 AM On a more personal level, my father returned from Spain on the eve of 'The War Against Fascism', having been wounded and held prisoner there. He received no hero's welcome; rather he was met with excommunication from his church for fighting on the wrong side, was awarded a police record as "a premature anti-fascist" and became unemployed because of having being 'blacklisted' from his job. Unable to find work he became one of McAlpine's Fusiliers, the result being that I don't think my sister and I met him more than a dozen times before my tenth birthday, Bit of a contradiction there laddie. My father was in uniform from 1938 to 1947, and yours was....? Do try to be accurate and do not try to bamboozle us. You are always found out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Apr 20 - 10:35 AM " and yours was....?" Wounded and disabled for having volunteer to fight fascism at a time might have been stopped while Britain was still sucking up to Herr Hitler and trying to appease him He earned the awrd of being a "premature ant-fascist' and spent the next fifteen years being punished for it as did his wife and children Had Britain opposed Hitler at his weakest the people of Guernica and Madrid wouldn't have been blanket bombed by the revived Lufftwaffe flexing their muscles Nor might you and many other fathers had to go to war - but that's capitalis self-interest for you Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Apr 20 - 10:51 AM Well ???? im Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Apr 20 - 11:04 AM My grandad was a genuine Dunkirk hero, a fine example of British military bearing, right to his end, and a primary role model of strong proud dignified dependable manhood for me... He served from boy soldier long before WW2, to his retirement some time afterwards.. A battle hardened man others turned to in a dire crisis, long after the war.. He died from cancer in the 1970s, so never had to suffer Thatcher. He would definitely not have a good opinion of what successive tory governments have done to our nation, the country he would have readily defended to the death; like too many of his good mates at Dunkirk.. When our family hears tories glibly calling on the 'Dunkirk Spirit' we laugh in contempt, convinced so many of them would have been on the other side in that war... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Apr 20 - 11:21 AM "He would definitely not have a good opinion of what successive tory governments have done to our nation," He' love to see Robinson and his scum back on the streets becausee of the 'savage invading hordes' policy of the Brexiteers led bt Farage - I'm sure When the war ended it was Labour who rebullt Britain and tried to make it the "land fit for heroes to live in" promised to men like your father Avery decent step was opposed by the Tories - health and housing for all, a share in the nations profits, a decent benefit system What did the Tories say to those "No Pasaran" (They shall not Pass) Nothing about the Tories has changed in the interim period - look at the way they're behaving in this crisis Jim |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Apr 20 - 11:37 AM Worldwide shortages...??? When will it dawn on our govt that we will need our own permanent PPE, and other vital supplies manufacturing industry.. State financed if necessary... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: DMcG Date: 20 Apr 20 - 12:02 PM That related back to my post of 17 Apr 20 - 03:54 AM Both left and right wing agree that there are limits to what you should leave to the free market when it comes to the welfare of the country. I have yet to hear a free marketeer recommending we disband all the military and hire an army when we need one: the market will provide. But I would not be entirely surprised to learn if there were some. For PPE we have decided to leave it to the market because we simply buy it if we needed it - well, that idea hasn't *quite* failed yet, but it is decidedly teetering on the brink. And we are only keeping it there because we are lowering the standards from what we previously thought essential (Which makes me think of all the "not lowering standards" such as for food and workers protections we have heard around Brexit: when promises hit the real world the promises vanish. Let's leave that for another time.) I would say we need a proper assessment of what we really need to protect this country, not driven by such simplifications as "free market" and the rest. I don't think anything good is likely to come out of Brexit, but if we took a serious look at what do we genuinely need to protect the country, rather than making us even more dependent on "the free market" , it is possible something worthwhile could |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Apr 20 - 12:22 PM I'm in the bathroom now, but even if I wasn't I haven't got time or inclination to be arsed with googling for confirming fact. Suffice to say, within the last week I've read plausible news reports America is using its immense buying power to grab as much worldwide supply of PPE as it can hoard. Pushing up prices for whatever morsels are left available.. Trump is boasting they have more vital medical gear in storage, than they need at the moment; and when the time is right for him, he might show the rest of the world what a wonderful generous leader he is and possibly share some of it with us.. Obviously on his terms and conditions.. what a hero... Shame about all the people dying in the rest of the world deprived by his Monopoly, while we wait for his magnanimous gesture.. This is my encapsulation of what I have seen and heard on the news, And I'm inclined to believe a lot of it... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Raggytash Date: 20 Apr 20 - 12:28 PM Sir Philip Rutnam has launched an Industrial Tribunal claim for constructive dismissal. Oh course his boss was Priti Patel. He claims that she had made unreasonable demands on staff and had belittled officials in her department. The outcome of this will be interesting ...…..to say the least. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Apr 20 - 12:55 PM "America is using its immense buying power to grab as much worldwide supply of PPE as it can hoard." It seems this has been happening for some time - largely ignored until the Government was forced to make it illegal because of major shortages US big business has been buying and hoarding essential equipmen which has forced prices up - when they reach r=the desired level, they are shipped abroad Sounds like their 'patriots' aren't very different THAN OURS Jim |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Apr 20 - 01:31 PM Basically, for all the brexit ideologue's rhetoric about independence.. We NEED to be genuinely self sufficient in the supplies and services vital for keeping our population in healthy well being.. State funded, even nationalised, industry has to be an essential factor in a truly effective Mixed Econonomy.. It must not be demonised and dismissed as 'communism', 'socialism', or 'anyotherism'.. It's just plain simple common sense... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Apr 20 - 01:34 PM errmm.. yes I do have college qualifications in econonononononomics.. Bastard spellcheck failed to flag that one before I posted... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Iains Date: 20 Apr 20 - 02:24 PM There may be a valid concern about offshoring but you have to remember that competitive tendering applies throuhout the EU in all sectors. The only exemption permitted is for strategic concerns ie defence only. Having seen attempted hijacking of PPE by Germany and France even contracts within the EU are not honoured. It is likely this virus will be a wake up call for many sectors of industry to repatriate. However there will be a cost escalation involved. Companies do not offshore for any other reason than to make money. There are many examples where companies have availed themselves of government grants to establish. Once the mandatory time period has elapsed to ensure qualification they have upped sticks, with an EU grant, and shot off to eastern Europe, leaving devastated towns behind them. If China is made a pariah(as seems likely) there will be many supply chains suffering major disruption. It is going to be untidy while it sorts itself out. Just as well we did not offshore spitfire manufacturing to Germany all those years ago. Much of modern manufacturing relies on rare earths, even if only for control cicuitry. Electric cars, mobile phones, computer memory, DVDs, rechargeable batteries, catalytic converters, magnets, fluorescent lighting and much more...... Here's a look at the countries that mined the most rare earths in 2018, as per the latest data from US Geological Survey. China. Mine production: 120,000 MT. ... Australia. Mine production: 20,000 MT. ... United States. Mine production: 15,000 MT. ... Myanmar. Mine production: 5,000 MT. If China wants to play hardball...Oh Dear! Might be time to go grovelling among the ice and snow in Greenland. The Kvanefjeld project has JORC 2012-compliant resources of one billion tonnes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Apr 20 - 02:29 PM These are crucial concerns which should be above and protected from partisan party politicking... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 20 Apr 20 - 02:41 PM After a respectable absence - no response to my answer Iains Conceding defeat again IC - and whose to blame you Don't you dare my family into these discussions again - this is not the first time France was A VICTIM OF HI-JACKING France acted in it people's interests bu refusing to let equiplent leave the country when it was badly hit - any country would have done so Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Apr 20 - 02:55 PM One news item I heard was trump sanctioned the hijack of a ship load of PPE already en route to the nation that purchased it... President Pirate.. arrr... Any truth in that, should be out there.. Personally, I'm happy to take it at face value.. it's so plausible... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Raggytash Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:09 PM Jim ….........…. have you been drinking. That last post was unintelligible even by your standards. Care to post it again? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Iains Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:17 PM Don't you dare my family into these discussions again - this is not the first time As I recall you did, and not for the first time. Would you like the links? You have no compunction in dragging my family in the discussion though. A typical lefty: Do as I say, not as I do. You make it hard to respond to your points, some because they make no sense, others because they a are purely an extremist view. It would be like talking to indiarubber to refute them. It is simply not worth my time. Just look at the provocative shite you posted. He' love to see Robinson and his scum back on the streets becausee of the 'savage invading hordes' policy of the Brexiteers led bt Farage - I'm sure. I guess you are reverting to your second childhood. Do you really think such posts are helpful, or do you just like crashing threads? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:28 PM Iains - if you didn't relish the sport of provoking Jim so much, I'm sure he'd not get so distracted, losing his clarity of focus fighting with you. But that's it isn't it, you don't want Jim to stick to the point posting serious incisive arguments against your politics and tory government...!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Apr 20 - 03:52 PM "Here's a look at the countries that mined the most rare earths in 2018, as per the latest data from US Geological Survey. China. Mine production: 120,000 MT. ... Australia. Mine production: 20,000 MT. ... United States. Mine production: 15,000 MT. ... Myanmar. Mine production: 5,000 MT. If China wants to play hardball...Oh Dear! Might be time to go grovelling among the ice and snow in Greenland. The Kvanefjeld project has JORC 2012-compliant resources of one billion tonnes." Meaningless inexplicable obscurantist out-of-context drivel. We know how much you want to show us how geologically clever you are, but this nonsense simply demonstrates the precise opposite (not for the first time, of course). And it represents severe bad manners to boot. No, I'm not going to bother looking it up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Iains Date: 20 Apr 20 - 04:47 PM congratulations on being capable ofcopying and pasting shaw. You really wouldbe better off learning how to construct links though. Perhaps obscurantist to you, but it is shorthand to say the reserves have been calculated in such a fashion as to comply with a recognised standard and thus are reasonably reliable. I suspect you are one of the last people on mudcat competant to instruct anyone on manners. You merely display your arrogance to all and sundry. Well done! Would you like me to post cartoons so you can keep up with the narrative? Personal attack, Iains. Please stop. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Iains Date: 20 Apr 20 - 05:07 PM "The average pundit’s view has been the election of Sir Keir signalled a change in attitude by Labour’s membership away from ideology and towards electability. Left-wingers will therefore be disappointed to see YouGov’s polling today, which shows Boris’s lead on ‘best PM’ has plunged, err, 3% in Keir’s first three weeks as leader – remaining 27% ahead of Sir Keir. Amongst Labour members, Boris has risen from 6% to 8%, with one third not sure. Starmer’s bounce is weak"… He is only polling 4% more than Corbyn. For a politicion's honeymoon period those figures are not good for Starmer. I had best give the source otherwise someone will ......... https://order-order.com/2020/04/20/starmers-bounce-polls/ The idea of repatriating certain manufacturing processes is obviously something that will discussed thoroughly in coming months. Globalism will collide head on with populism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Dave the Gnome Date: 20 Apr 20 - 05:14 PM I think it is a lost cause, Barb'ry :-( I'm not sure what can be done apart from ban UK politics altogether. Sadly that means the people that want to shut down the criticism of the present government have won on here but what the heck. It is a folk music forum anyway. There are plenty of social media sites where the their tactics are not tolerated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Raggytash Date: 20 Apr 20 - 05:22 PM Oh I don't know Dave, I wouldn't normally lower myself to log-on to Guido. The fact that some people actually respond to his out of context dribblings that have no analysis or depth only helps to confirm my belief that such people are somewhat lacking in critical abilities. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Barb'ry Date: 20 Apr 20 - 05:34 PM Evening all. This whole thread goes from being interesting to name calling stupidity in a matter of seconds. I won't shut it down (although I feel there will be other mods who would like to do so) and I will fight your corner. Saying that, there is a real necessity to cut out the name calling, be it overt or poorly veiled. I know politics makes temperatures run high but if we are to keep this thread and ALL its contributors, then you have to be able to recognise flame-bait, trolling etc and scroll past, rather than plunging head first into the abyss. Thanks everyone B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Apr 20 - 06:34 PM Well, Barb'ry, I'm not going to do all that personal attack-dog stuff, but the post I pointed to (in my 03.52 PM post) was just grandstanding, deliberately designed to impress the geological no-nothings (as he sees it) with jargonistic abbreviations which failed to give any indication of net yields of rare earths from ores and with this obscure and unexplained reference: "the Kvanefjeld project has JORC 2012-compliant resources of one billion tonnes." Cor blimey, guv! :-) If we are to have lusty debate we do need to be able to sternly call out nonsense in posts, but without the obnoxious name-calling stuff. I know he doesn't like it, but... I'm not a geological know-nothing, by the way, unfortunately for him... And you're doing a grand job! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Mossback Date: 20 Apr 20 - 06:47 PM I'm not sure what can be done apart from ban UK politics altogether. Ahem. One might ban the "gentleman" (and I use the term advisably) who is the major instigator & problem. Others have been "disappeared" for much more minor offenses. NB: This is NOT a criticism of Barbara. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Stilly River Sage Date: 20 Apr 20 - 09:37 PM British Writer Pens The Best Description Of Trump I’ve Read |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: punkfolkrocker Date: 20 Apr 20 - 11:40 PM "I think it is a lost cause, Barb'ry :-( I'm not sure what can be done apart from ban UK politics altogether. Sadly that means the people that want to shut down the criticism of the present government have won on here " DtG - Let's not give into defeatism, mudcat mates.. We mustn't let the bully boy censors win, whatever tactics they use to shut up debate..... I don't have time or desire to find another internet site, with a new crowd of folks to talk politics with.. I've too much time invested here with you lot.. ..for better or worse... This is the only place I know that's enough like a 'friendly' local pub or club with old familiar faces Sites likes facebook and twitter are more like scrawling hit-and-run graffiti on a bog door... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: DMcG Date: 21 Apr 20 - 02:18 AM There may be a valid concern about offshoring but you have to remember that competitive tendering applies throuhout the EU in all sectors. The only exemption permitted is for strategic concerns ie defence only. One myth that has developed during the while Brexit debate is that peple are either rabid leavers who as so committed to splitting from the EU that they ae prepared for the whole country to collapse, or they are fanatical supporters of the EU and in their eyes it can do no wrong. Both of those are wrong. There are a substantial number, maybe even the majority, who are closer to a neutral position: it has benefits, and it has failings, but when you add all these together you are somewhat a leaver, or somewhat a remainer. That is one reason why I think Corbyn's much-mocked '7 out of 10' is actually much closer to how people thought (though most in the end were more like 4 out of 10, not 7). Good in parts. perhaps, is a fair way of describing it. I would count myself as a "7 out of 10"-er myself. I have often said the EU is two projects, one economic and one social. The economic one is very free market, and the rule that all contracts have to be offered to all countries making up the EU is very much part of that. I have not yet located the exact rules, but if it says 'national security' rather than 'defence' (and indeed even if it says defence without qualifying it), it could be argued that things like PPE are necessary for national security. It seems likely most countries would be willing to agree that such things are valid exceptions in future. But in any cases, most of the left-leaning Leave supporters were of this mind anyway: the free market aspects severely restricted state subsidies of industries that the individual countries regarded as important, for example. Hence, again, why Corbyn could not score higher than 7. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Apr 20 - 02:46 AM Ok. Having slept on it, you are right. The thread should continue but let's make Barb'ry's task easier by not responding to name calling, trolling and flame-baiting. Trouble some people insert these activities into otherwise reasonable posts and we cannot expect Barb'ry to remove the rotten bits and leave the sound. She needs to remove the whole lot. So, you know who you are, if you have a genuine point to make, don't add unnecessary insults or flame bait. I will not respond to any posts, from anyone, if they contain any such nonsense. Even if the rest of the post is a genuine political comment. I can only hope that others will do the same and that the moderation team will remove offending posts and any response to them swiftly. Hope you have a lot of patience, Barb'ry as I think you will have your work cut out :-( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:15 AM "Would you like the links? " Yes please, but I won't hold my breath - not able nowadays anyway Igf you honetly believe that attacking scumbags like Farage is insulting you really must live way out in the sticks - it is he and his like who opened the floodgates of racism that are engulfing Britain with a POSTER echoing the filth that got Enoch Powell drummed out of politics The fact that he did is a fair measuring stick of how Britain has changed in a relatively short time - what was unacceptable then is https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2016/06/25/483362200/brexit-whats-race-got-to-do-with-it?t=1587452345369 now I too welcome Ms Allen's (pet name) new broom, but I find that when we are told to ignore individuals who constantly and deliberately insult bother people' arguments and them as individuals as a replacement for rational argument it's a bit beyond the call.. It means the forum becomes a soapbox for such individuals I always understood that the guidelines for membership are infinitely sensible and maybe should be more than just guidelines This really has gone on for over four/five years now "These are the times that try men's souls" - as a hero of mine once said - we need to be able to discuss what's happening around us without all this flung shit JIm |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Dave the Gnome Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:25 AM Suit yourself, Jim. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Backwoodsman Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:26 AM It’s so childishly simple, and it’s stated in the Forum advice for dealing with problem posters - Don’t Feed The Troll. Trolls feed off a lack of self-control on the part of their targets. The troll is desperate to provoke a reaction. When he’s ignored, his flame-baiting increases in intensity. If nobody responds, his obnoxious behaviour sticks out like a sore thumb, and dealing with it becomes so much easier for the mods. You’re intelligent people. For god’s sake behave like intelligent people and refuse to allow his provocation to affect you. If you want to make a point, do it once only, then leave it - when he comes back with his nonsense, IGNORE IT! If he responds with garbage and insults to something you’ve posted, you’ve WON, walk away! His horse-shit fools nobody who’s of any consequence. If I can do it, anyone can. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Iains Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:30 AM "Meaningless inexplicable obscurantist out-of-context drivel." If the above is not insulting, pray tell, what is it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:37 AM "Suit yourself, Jim." I've tried Dave - my "soapbox" point remains, as does the fact that I know people, Irish in particular, who refuse to post because of behaviour such as his - we don't have many from ethnic groups on this forum but it would be a tremendous boost to both parts of it if we did Travellers are now becoming a part of the Irish music renaissance - they's probably do a runned if they say how that were depicted here It seems a little self-indulgent and 'gentleman's clubbish' to just 'pass by on the other side Ok for hardened veterans, but it ain't gonna win new friend and influence them I would love to see people discuss that rather than the "ignore him" mantra Sorry Jim |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Iains Date: 21 Apr 20 - 03:57 AM @DMcG Theregulations on compettive tendering within the UK are quite clear. However exemption can be claimed for emergencies. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/35925/dsd_govt_awareness_guide.p From the EU guidlines: Usually, all medium and higher value contracts must be awarded through competitive procedures (tenders), although there are exclusions and exceptions, such as: purchasing real estate cases of extreme urgency situations where there is only one possible supplier https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/selling-in-eu/public-contracts/public-tendering-rules/index_en.htm It seems likely most countries would be willing to agree that such things are valid exceptions in future That is likely the least of many changes. An interesting article from the economist: The great PPE scramble Why countries can’t meet the demand for gear against covid-19 https://www.economist.com/international/2020/04/19/why-countries-cant-meet-the-demand-for-gear-against-covid-19?fsrc=newsletter& |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: peteglasgow Date: 21 Apr 20 - 04:02 AM well, we tried to reset but it wasn't long before the shadow of a troll came rolling along and jim and others couldn't help but get annoyed. i usually withdraw for a bit until he pushes one or more of my buttons.......they give birth astride a grave the light flashes an instant and then it's dark once more.....Mod would it possible to ban Ian for, say, 6 weeks. just as an expirement - that's all - with the expectation that he comes back after that if he wants to? obviously it wouldn't solve all the problems and others may step up to the abusive plate, then suspend them. some of us do enjoy a political discussion and i don't see why this topic has to be all or nothing. like a football match - you have the choice to wave a yellow card. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Apr 20 - 04:46 AM "Meaningless inexplicable obscurantist out-of-context drivel." "If the above is not insulting, pray tell, what is it?" Oh no you don't. That was not an insult. It looks that way if you strip it out of its context, which is precisely what you've done here. When challenged I explained why I said what I did but you've chosen not to quote that post. You deliberately tried to grandstand your "geological knowledge" in an obscurantist section of a post which was intended to bamboozle us, and now you're cross because it didn't work. Some of us are not as daft as you think we are. I'll also add that, in the remark you chose to quote, I attacked (lustily - it is politics, dammit) SOME OF the content of your post, not the person. If we're talking politics, it's fine to say "You're talking rubbish and I can support that contention, thus..." It's not fine to say "You're talking rubbish because you have a brain the size of an amoeba, and I'm going to call you shaw or little jimmie to prove it." Sadly, that's a not-so-subtle difference that you have yet to appreciate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Iains Date: 21 Apr 20 - 04:52 AM I am wise to your games Shaw. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: peteglasgow Date: 21 Apr 20 - 05:02 AM i have long been wise to your game, ian. and will continue to try and stop it. occasionally, when i can be bothered |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Barb'ry Date: 21 Apr 20 - 05:31 AM I'm posting on here almost as much as you are! I've had my say and you've had yours. I don't want to close threads or ban people, nor do I want to start deleting threads or posts. What you (some, not all) need to understand are the consequences of your posts. The interesting bit comes first, followed by the nastiness, the dig, the insult, which totally negates the trouble you have spent posting in the first place. And then we get the obvious and inescapable retorts and responses that cause the problems. The initial remark can be ignored (yes, Jim, even you can walk on by...) the flame doesn't get fed. I'm sure you all know this already but maybe this will be the last try. Argue like pleasant, sensible adults - argue all you want but don't let it descend into playground behaviour, please. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: peteglasgow Date: 21 Apr 20 - 05:42 AM ok, will try again - but why do we have to abandon the whole game rather than just trying to discipline one or two persistent offenders? it's been done before |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Jim Carroll Date: 21 Apr 20 - 06:02 AM "even you can walk on by." But I hate that squeaky-voiced Dionne Warwick Give it another try - I'll have to just let my Irish friends know when it's safe to come out Jim |
|
Subject: RE: BS: UK Politics. Moderated thread From: Iains Date: 21 Apr 20 - 07:32 AM Sir Keith Starmer: Labour party boss boasted that if he were in Government, the lockdown would have come earlier, with stricter controls. “I think if you look back, what you would have seen from a Labour government is a willingness to act more clearly and more decisively. So we were saying weeks ago that there should be strict controls, that it was clear that the infection was getting out of control, and that the government need to act more quickly and more decisively. And we would have done that.”. Labour party minion Shadow Chancellor Anneleise Dodds disagreeing with Rory Stewart’s call to enact harsher measures on Westminster Hour on 8 March: “I completely take on board what Rory was saying but I’ve been very very impressed by the world of the Chief Dodds went on to support the Government’s plan, and emphasised the need to listen to the scientific advice the Government is receiving. “I don’t think this is a reflection of passivity, just to make that clear. The Action Plan that the Government has set out, and I mean okay the Government are of a different political persuasion to mine, but they have stated that at some point we will have to shift from the containment stage to the delay stage… Dodds was defending the work of SAGE against Rory Stewart’s claim on the program that politicians need to be the ones to take decisions as scientists often have a narrow focus. Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive....... Labour playing politics with covid-19 " |