Do you want to discuss boring politics? (28 Viewers)

mmttww · 2026-02-06T16:17:49+0000

Nick said:
Again, absolutely nothing to dispute my points.

Literally all I've been doing is disputing your points. I'm talking directly to you about something you said and giving an alternative opinion. Which is what forums are meant to be for. Your response was to claim that I'm calling you racist. Which is a massive deflection. Because I didn't say or infer you were racist. In response, you just tell me I'm deflecting. Which is deflecting. Make it make sense!

I want this to be the end of it because folks trying to talk politics are having to sift through us having a cat fight. You can DM about it if you want because we stopped talking politics and started talking insults about three rounds ago. It's basically two people shouting at each other about deflecting which must be the most boring thing anyone on here has ever had to scroll through. I'll do better next time, folks!

it does make me think of deflector shields in Star Trek or Star Wars, tbf but I'm not sure it's been worth it.

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · 2026-02-06T16:17:57+0000

Grendel said:
These protestors aren’t doing any damage they are standing on a road - I don’t think you understand what the ruling means?

And what about people who block roads to oil refineries or petrochemical plants belching greenhouse gases and carcinogens into the air? Or nuclear plants? Or water treatment plants releasing raw sewage into our waterways? All of these have the potential to cause catastrophic damage to the environment and the people (and animals) in it. So for them it is morally perfectly acceptable to peacefully protest at them. Others believe that this causes too much disruption for everyday people and so they should be prosecuted.

In this instance you believe animal testing is abhorrent and should be a viable place to peacefully protest. Fair enough. Others believe it is a necessary evil to help develop new drugs and cures and so should not be a viable place to protest.

I remember years ago when a woman was killed blocking a road to Coventry airport while protesting the live export of veal calves (?) and I have no doubt you would have had every sympathy for her cause. Would you have been so bothered had it been Greenpeace blocking an oil refinery to prevent the entrance/exit of oil/petrol? Or the anti nuclear weapons protestors who were found guilty when blocking the entrance to a nuclear weapons factory a few years ago?

PVA · 2026-02-06T16:17:59+0000

Nick said:
I'm not about that. My original point is why is somebody more passionate about one issue thousands of miles away but not ones closer to their doorstep or others thousands of miles away.

People can be passionate about whatever they like surely, regardless of distance?

If someone is more upset by Gaza than they are by animal testing in the UK that's their perogative.

If someone is more upset by UK grooming gangs than Epstein's paedophile ring that's also their perogative.

This notion that if you don't post about something then that means you don't care about it is absolute nonsense.

Grendel · 2026-02-06T16:20:34+0000

Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
And what about people who block roads to oil refineries or petrochemical plants belching greenhouse gases and carcinogens into the air? Or nuclear plants? Or water treatment plants releasing raw sewage into our waterways? All of these have the potential to cause catastrophic damage to the environment and the people (and animals) in it. So for them it is morally perfectly acceptable to peacefully protest at them. Others believe that this causes too much disruption for everyday people and so they should be prosecuted.

In this instance you believe animal testing is abhorrent and should be a viable place to peacefully protest. Fair enough. Others believe it is a necessary evil to help develop new drugs and cures and so should not be a viable place to protest.

I remember years ago when a woman was killed blocking a road to Coventry airport while protesting the live export of veal calves (?) and I have no doubt you would have had every sympathy for her cause. Would you have been so bothered had it been Greenpeace blocking an oil refinery to prevent the entrance/exit of oil/petrol? Or the anti nuclear weapons protestors who were found guilty when blocking the entrance to a nuclear weapons factory a few years ago?

It isn’t roads blocked to refineries? It’s any road to cause disruption? It’s fronted by a Marxist antagonist? What are you on about?

Most of these people have cars - sorry to break that to you

Nick · 2026-02-06T16:22:31+0000

mmttww said:
Literally all I've been doing is disputing your points. I'm talking directly to you about something you said and giving an alternative opinion. Which is what forums are meant to be for. Your response was to claim that I'm calling you racist. Which is a massive deflection. Because I didn't say or infer you were racist. In response, you just tell me I'm deflecting. Which is deflecting. Make it make sense!

I want this to be the end of it on here because folks trying to talk about politics are having to sift through us having a cat fight. You can DM about it if you want because we stopped talking politics and started talking insults about three rounds ago. It's basically two people shouting at each other about deflecting which must be the most boring thing anyone on here has ever had to scroll through. I'm sorry, folks. I'll do better next time.

it does make me think of deflector shields in Star Trek or Star Wars, tbf but I'm not sure it's been worth it.

How am I deflecting when I have said to look at my posts and somebody else has also said I'm consistent on that topic? I addressed what you said. What am I deflecting from? The "consistency" thing that both me and somebody else addressed ages ago?

You haven't given an alternative opinion, you jumped in with the shit racism shout and then acted like a victim and made shit threats when it didn't work.

This is why I don't touch drugs.

mmttww · 2026-02-06T16:24:32+0000

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 said:
My dogs are one of those things that just give you unconditional love. No matter how shit your day is, city lose, something bad happens, they are still all over you once you come through the door. Both of them are rescues, one from the streets, the other rescued from a gypsy camp where she was kicked around and beaten. I just cannot understand anyone that wants to hurt animals. They are priceless.

Great post. Had an old GF that rescued a dog from a camp, called it Tyson to spite the pricks. I remember reading about all the dogs couples stuck together in lockdown had bought then dumped in shelters the minute they could get EasyJets to Croatia again. Not violence, but so grim. Treat them with the kindness you would a person or don't get one. Tw*ts.

Nick · 2026-02-06T16:26:28+0000

mmttww said:
Great post. Had an old GF that rescued a dog from a camp. She called it Tyson to spite the pricks. I remember reading about all the dogs that couples stuck together in lockdown had bought then getting dumped in shelters the minute they could get EasyJets to Croatia again. Not violence, but so grim. Treat them with the kindness you would a person or don't get one. Tw*ts.

I agree with you on this though. Anybody who harms dogs should get the same treatment tenfold

mmttww · 2026-02-06T16:26:36+0000

Nick said:
This is why I don't touch drugs.

You should. You'd use more .GIFs. Booze and coffee are more addictive and harmful than a joint, tbf!

mmttww · 2026-02-06T16:27:53+0000

Nick said:
I agree with you on this though. Anybody who harms dogs should get the same treatment tenfold

I'm not saying they should be shot, Nick

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · 2026-02-06T16:28:40+0000

Grendel said:
Well it’s interesting what is a popular issue and what isnt

People cannot be on top of everything going on everywhere, so as such are limited to what is available via media. Hence why those get the most attention and discussed the most. Doesn't mean those people wouldn't also be as outraged by what is going on in other places, such as the Congo, if it were more prominent.

If someone came on here and had posts about every single conflict going on in the world and their position on it, you'd tell them to get a life and why are they so bothered about things that has nothing to do with them/this country.

Nick · 2026-02-06T16:30:01+0000

mmttww said:
I'm not saying they should be shot, Nick

I am.

Sky_Blue_Dreamer · 2026-02-06T16:30:54+0000

Nick said:
I agree with you on this though. Anybody who harms dogs should get the same treatment tenfold

They should be four-pawed (though that's only double rather than tenfold)

mmttww · 2026-02-06T16:31:30+0000

Nick said:
I am.

I know, and disagree, and we've seen what happens when we go down that road, so I'm gonna go take loads of drugs instead and get off the internet.

Brighton Sky Blue · 2026-02-06T16:31:54+0000

Grendel said:
Why?

Because this country is involved in arming the perpetrators.

Grendel · 2026-02-06T16:38:01+0000

Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
People cannot be on top of everything going on everywhere, so as such are limited to what is available via media. Hence why those get the most attention and discussed the most. Doesn't mean those people wouldn't also be as outraged by what is going on in other places, such as the Congo, if it were more prominent.

If someone came on here and had posts about every single conflict going on in the world and their position on it, you'd tell them to get a life and why are they so bothered about things that has nothing to do with them/this country.

Why only this conflict then? You are literally admitting this is a trend for people to follow

Grendel · 2026-02-06T16:39:12+0000

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Because this country is involved in arming the perpetrators.

Oddly that’s what selling arms to anyone tends to do! It’s an industry

Brighton Sky Blue · 2026-02-06T16:41:38+0000

Grendel said:
Oddly that’s what selling arms to anyone tends to do! It’s an industry

Meh, people are entitled to be passionate about whatever they want in my book, as long as they aren't hurting anyone. Better to be passionate about something than nothing

wingy · 2026-02-06T16:44:39+0000

Grendel said:
The plight of the Gaza people is nothing compared to the Congo - guess we have to work out why people aren’t protesting for the impoverished black Africans but stand united behind people under seige by the US backed Jewish State

I've raised that on here about DR Congo and Rwanda funding terrorist,
Who were funded indirectly by us but we can't talk about that ,may have got those girls in Southport murdered,who knows.

Earlsdon_Skyblue1 · 2026-02-06T16:57:07+0000

mmttww said:
Great post. Had an old GF that rescued a dog from a camp, called it Tyson to spite the pricks. I remember reading about all the dogs couples stuck together in lockdown had bought then dumped in shelters the minute they could get EasyJets to Croatia again. Not violence, but so grim. Treat them with the kindness you would a person or don't get one. Tw*ts.

I am quite close to the charities that the dogs came from, and their work is really good, but heart-breaking at the same time. Smaller charities that deal with really bad situations, or picking up the pieces from people like you mentioned. There was one lad recently who had effectively lost use of his back legs out in Romania and was left for dead. I am not really ashamed to say I was basically in tears when I saw his story, which was from the same lady who found one of my dogs, so they had me over a barrel really and I couldn't wait to give them some money for his surgery. Had the update that he was now cleared to go to the UK, and was being rehabilitated, also funnily enough by another lady, who was the same foster carer of mine before I adopted her. He will hopefully be fit enough to get adopted himself soon. It genuinely made my week.

LarryGrayson · 2026-02-06T17:36:49+0000

i always think he writes well

Michael Rosen said:
Today I spent an hour and a half in a studio at the BBC, talking to 12 local radio stations, one after the other, about Holocaust Memorial Day. I talked about people in my family (Jews) who were arrested, imprisoned, deported and killed in Auschwitz. I talked about how I got to find out the details of how each of them was trapped as the net closed in round Jews in France (where my father's uncles and aunt lived.) I talked about how the Nazi project was to not only eliminate living Jews but to try to remove them from German history and that my project to 'find' them and write about them, was to not let them disappear from memory, or from being known.

Several themes emerged in the interviewers' questions and the answers I gave - and in my thoughts.

1. The Holocaust was a way of eliminating people. It wasn't a war in the usual sense of the word. It wasn't a fight between two or more combatants. You could say that it was a war on people.

2. The Holocaust was carried out by the Nazis and their collaborators. If we say 'Never again' or anything similar, one of the things we have to do is investigate what it was that the Nazis did, before they came to power and during the time they were in power. This involves facing up to the fact that they were the largest political party when they won power, that they brought in two key acts of parliament (the Reichstag Fire Decree and the Enabling Act, which mean that a) they had total dictatorial power and b) that they eliminated most of the political opposition through terror, imprisonment and violence). That their 'project' progressed as their rule progressed and as the war progressed. In short from persecution to genocide.

3. Much as we'd like to say that the Nazis were 'beasts' or 'animals', the really distressing and difficult thing to say is that they were human. And not only that, some of them were clever. We have to try to understand what does it mean to be the kind of clever human who can be someone who can organise, run and enact genocide - several genocides.

4. There was a Nazi project. They wrote about it and explained it. They enacted it. It involved on the one hand producing a new kind of human, one that would require them to eliminate elements that they thought prevented this human from becoming its true form. On the other hand, it involved creating an empire by absorbing lands in the east. In order to achieve this twin aim, the Nazis had to 'get rid' of people. Millions and millions of people.

5. If we say 'never again', it is possible to say, this means 'never again for Jews' or 'Jews must never again be targeted in that way'. It is also possible to see 'Never again' as a hope or wish that there should never again be that kind of genocide for anyone. I'm of this second school of thought, which is all well and good, but since 1945, when that aspiration surfaced there have been acts of genocide. One of the reasons we can and should say it's about all of humanity and not only Jews is that the Nazi project involved killing millions of people who were eg Poles (ie non-Jewish Poles), Roma and Sinti people, Russians, gays, mentally ill and physically disabled people, Afro-Germans, and even people who refused to swear an oath of loyalty such as Jehova's Witnesses, and thousands of civilian oppositionists - socialists, Communists, trade unionists, in camps like Dachau and Sachsenhausen.
6. For those that say, there have been many other terrible acts of genocide down through history, shouldn't we commemorate them? I say yes. I wish there were other Days when we mark the transatlantic slave trade and plantation slavery, or the Bengal Famine or Stalin's starvation of the Ukrainians, or the Famine in Ireland etc. There should not be any kind of league table. Each of these terrible moments of mass suffering should be moments we dwell on, investigate and learn from. How did they happen? Why did they happen? I guess I think, it'll be hard to progress unless we do investigate and understand these things.

SBAndy · 2026-02-06T18:35:15+0000

Grendel said:
Oddly that’s what selling arms to anyone tends to do! It’s an industry

But does that not give some kind of indication of why people feel more ‘drawn’ to that conflict than the Congo? There is a direct action that the government is taking which people, rightly or wrongly, feel that they are able to try and influence.

Grendel · 2026-02-06T18:36:51+0000

SBAndy said:
But does that not give some kind of indication of why people feel more ‘drawn’ to that conflict than the Congo? There is a direct action that the government is taking which people, rightly or wrongly, feel that they are able to try and influence.

So if the uk didn’t sell arms then there would be no Palestine protests? Ok

SBAndy · 2026-02-06T18:54:27+0000

Grendel said:
So if the uk didn’t sell arms then there would be no Palestine protests? Ok

Sorry, where did I say that?

Grendel · 2026-02-06T19:03:05+0000

SBAndy said:
Sorry, where did I say that?

What direct action are you referring to then?

Do you want to discuss boring politics? (28 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency