Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

Here you can comment on political news, create threads for open discussion.

Moderators: PoshinDevon, Soner, Dragon

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 1 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

Boris Johnson reported as saying in speech (source https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rn-english)
I want everybody who comes here and makes their lives here to be, and to feel, British – that’s the most important thing – and to learn English. And too often there are parts of our country, parts of London and other cities as well, where English is not spoken by some people as their first language and that needs to be changed.
I can not help but wonder if those that think 'yes he is right' think the following is also right
I want everybody who comes here and makes their lives here to be, and to feel, Turkish Cypriot – that’s the most important thing – and to learn Turkish. And too often there are parts of our country, parts of Girne and other cities as well, where Turkish is not spoken by some people as their first language and that needs to be changed.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 2 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

Erol, I know the Guardian are having hissy fits about Boris but calm down mate. He is going to win the leadership election and he will win the next general election.
Firstly, did he actually say this or is it a Guardian quote 'edited for reasons of space?'
He is capable of saying some stupid things but do you believe he is a racist, far right, extreme right or a Nazi? It seems to be a popular accusation by those who seem to ignore the various spectrums such as Fascist, Far right, Right, Centre right, centre, centre left, left, far left then communist. Basically to them anyone to the right of Corbyn is a fascist which means Boris will share that category with Tony Benn, Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock amongst others.
Last edited by EnjoyingTheSun on Sat 06 Jul 2019 9:49 am, edited 2 times in total.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 3 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

As for the question;
I know some Turkish but am embarassed at how little I know. The English as a rule are dreadful at languages, I'm sure the main reason we have a special relationship with America is because they are one of the few nations who are as bad at languages as we are. Luckily we both speak the language that is mosts second language so are able to muddle through. Were we Swedish our options would be a lot more limited.
I accept that I am at a disadvantage by not knowing more Turkish. If it was impossible to function here without Turkish then I accept that I would either have to learn more or leave.
What I wouldn't expect is for the government to provide a translator on demand at the tax payers expense when I needed one.
I moved here because I like the way of life, there are things from Britain that I miss but I do not expect the Cypriots to provide them for me.
My immediate neighbours are mainland Turks and TCs but I guess people do congregate in little enclaves.
Generally races, nationalities, cultures etc do feel more comfortable together although it is apparently racist to acknowledge that simple fact of life.
I find getting the visa every year and the process ludicrous but that was the deal when I signed up and I do not expect the Cypriots to change one thing to accommodate me. Its their garden, bat and ball. I would be grateful for any changes that eased my path but I wouldn't call them racists if they didn't change anything. It is their country and they have arranged it how they wish and I am very grateful that I am allowed to join them.

Ragged Robin
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 2038
Joined: Mon 26 May 2014 5:15 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 4 of 70 in Discussion

Post by Ragged Robin »

erol wrote:B And too often there are parts of our country, parts of London and other cities as well, where English is not spoken by some people as their first language and that needs to be changed.

Maybe Boris Johnson was just quoting George Benard Shaw:



One common language I'm afraid we'll never get.
Oh, why can't the English learn to set
A good example to people whose
English is painful to your ears?
The Scotch and the Irish leave you close to tears.
There even are places where English completely
Disappears. In America, they haven't used it for years!
Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?
Norwegians learn Norwegian; the Greeks have taught their
Greek. In France every Frenchman knows
His language fro "A" to "Zed"
The French never care what they do, actually,
As long as they pronounce in properly.
Arabians learn Arabian with the speed of summer lightning.
And Hebrews learn it backwards,
Which is absolutely frightening.
But use proper English you're regarded as a freak.
Why can't the English,
Why can't the English learn to speak?

Ragged Robin
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 2038
Joined: Mon 26 May 2014 5:15 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 5 of 70 in Discussion

Post by Ragged Robin »

In fairness to those of us who do struggle to speak some Turkish, I must point out that settlers in the UK are given every assistance in learning the language- free evening classes, BBC programmes and even the Internet. Here the only way to learn is to pay for language classes.

Additionally, of course, English (or rather American, and I agree with GBS is is not the same language!) is the lingua franca of the modern world and they are surrounded by in it commerce , on the internet andon TV etc.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 6 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:As for the question;
Well it seems to me you have avoided the question. As far as I posed 'questions' they were do you agree with what Johnson was saying in regards to the UK and immigration and if you do, do you think the same applies to the TRNC as well. If you have answered these questions , the ones I did ask, then for me the answers have been lost in your rhetoric answering question I did not ask, about the guardian, misuse of labels like racist and the failings of those who are 'left wing' (nothing new there then). Nor, for the record, was the question 'how much Turkish do you speak', another question you have answered that was not asked.

Anyway I posed some questions but did not at that time offer my thoughts, which is what I will do now.

What I think Johnson was talking about was the impact on the social cohesion in a nation-state like the UK of immigration and specifically with regards to immigrant populations who do not integrate, with language used as a 'measure' of that integration. This I think is a worthwhile thing to discuss. I do not think he was saying immigrants in the UK who do not have English as their first language, are unable to function without English and thus must either learn it or leave.

Where I disagree with Johnson is in (1) not talking about different generations of immigrants, (2) in the implication of the need for some form of compulsion (this needs to be changed) I ll look at these areas of disagreement I have with Johnson in turn.

(1) If an immigrant population resists integration in to the country they immigrate to, as indicated by something like not speaking English, over generations then this would indeed in my opinion be a serious issue in terms of the social cohesion of the nation-state the immigrants have moved to. However I just do not think this happens, or indeed can happen. I do not think there is any 2nd generation immigrant in the UK who does not speak English, does not understand or share to some degree or other the common cultural values that make up 'being British'. I think this is also true in the TRNC. Whilst there are clearly many 1st generation immigrants to the TRNC that do not speak Turkish, do not understand or share to some degree or other the common cultural values that make up 'being Turkish Cypiot', I do not think there are any 2nd generation immigrants that this applies to. Therefore if you accept that the issue Johnson is talking about applies only to 1st generation immigrants, as I suggest it does, then the impact of such immigration on social cohesion is vastly less than if you think it applies to such immigrants down generations. So as far as you want to take this 'personally' I see no problem with you, as a 1st generation immigrant to the TRNC not talking Turkish just as I do not see this as a problem in the UK. If you were to have children in the TRNC and bring those children up so that they spoke no Turkish, understood or adopted none of the cultural values of 'Turkish Cypriotness', then that would be a problem for me but I remain unconvinced that such is even possible let alone happens.

(2) The phrase Johnson used "where English is not spoken by some people as their first language and that needs to be changed." implies to me that he thinks there needs to be some form of 'compulsion'. Given that I do not think the issue even exists other than for 1st generation immigrants I just do not agree with this assertion. I no more think the UK should make having to speak English a pre requisite of being able to immigrate there than I think the TRNC should make having to speak Turkish a pre requisite of being able to immigrate to the TRNC. Or, beyond just language, the idea that an immigrant needs to first share cultural values of the place they are immigrating to before being allowed to immigrate there. I do not think any such compulsion is necessary, for immigration to the UK or to the TRNC because I do not see 'British culture and values' as something weak and vulnerable such that the impact of 1st generation immigrants that do not adopt English as their first language and do not adopt, or adopt enough, the cultural values of 'being British' represent some sort of existential threat to 'Britishness'. I actually think 'Britishness' as a concept, the values and culture it represents are 'strong' and more than strong enough to not be threatened by a lack of 'integration' (language and all the rest) amongst 1st generation immigrants. It does puzzle me that people like Johnson have so little faith in the strength and power of the idea that is 'Britishness' and talk it down by implying it is threatened by a lack of integration amongst 1st generation immigrants to the UK. Nor do I think such 'compulsion' can even work even if it was necessary in regards to 'Britishness'. You can not compel someone to be 'more British' be that person a British citizen or an immigrant. It just does not work that way.

User avatar
Groucho
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3224
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2012 2:43 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 7 of 70 in Discussion

Post by Groucho »

erol wrote:I want everybody who comes here and makes their lives here to be, and to feel, Turkish Cypriot – that’s the most important thing – and to learn Turkish. And too often there are parts of our country, parts of Girne and other cities as well, where Turkish is not spoken by some people as their first language and that needs to be changed.
I would put it to you that, as we expats are no longer granted permanent residency let alone citizenship after 5 - 10 years even though the constitution would appear to support that, we are systematically not made to feel Turkish Cypriot.....

I went to Turkish lessons for 6 years, but the TRNC authorities do not make me welcome.... the Turkish Cypriots do but on a fundamental level we are discriminated against in the most un-friendly way officially.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 8 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

Groucho wrote: I would put it to you that, as we expats are no longer granted permanent residency let alone citizenship after 5 - 10 years even though the constitution would appear to support that, we are systematically not made to feel Turkish Cypriot.....

I went to Turkish lessons for 6 years, but the TRNC authorities do not make me welcome.... the Turkish Cypriots do but on a fundamental level we are discriminated against in the most un-friendly way officially.
I totally agree with you Groucho. If you say to me the lack of a proper system of permanent residency leading to eventual citizenship in the TRNC 'needs to change' I would and do agree unreservedly. I personally think it needs to change just on the basis of simple 'equity' but I also accept that the current de facto system also does little to encourage 'social cohesion' through 'integration' of migrants to the TRNC.

However that does not change my basic point about what Johnson was talking about. You could change 'TRNC' in my reworking of what Johnson said re the UK to say the RoC or Spain or any other number of places that do have proper and fair systems of permanent residency leading to citizenship. My point remains the same - such issues of lack of integration as indicated by language really only apply to 1st generation immigrants and even then to only a subset of them.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 9 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote: Nor, for the record, was the question 'how much Turkish do you speak', another question you have answered that was not asked.
I assume the thrust of your original post was to draw out those who have concerns about immigration in the UK to then hit them with the zinger “but you are an immigrant here!!!!” I answered about language in a way I thought was relevant. I do not speak as much Turkish as I would like but then I do not need to speak much because I can financially support myself and make a contribution to TRNC by spending my hard earned here. In the UK, Somalian immigrant’s standard of English is notoriously poor which no doubt is a major reason for the 60% unemployment amongst men. Which leads to the question what contribution do they make to the UK. Much as it would be a utopian ideal to take in every economic migrant in the world and improve their lives it is not practical or affordable. It would make far more sense to try to improve their lot in their original countries which I think we attempt to do with our generous foreign aid. The British people have also been generous in their support of charitable efforts in places such as Africa although that is thrown in our faces as us being a white saviour.
erol wrote: I do not think there is any 2nd generation immigrant in the UK who does not speak English, does not understand or share to some degree or other the common cultural values that make up 'being British'
The problem that Johnson can’t allude to, for fear of being labelled a fascist, although he and Rees Mogg are already being tarred as such, is the problem the UK is having with Islam. Forget that the UK and Europe are Christian countries they are, for the most part, secular. As is North Cyprus, which I would imagine is a big reason many of us moved here.
Islam does not seem to be fit easily into secular Britain. My main truck with the left in the UK is their moral gymnastics with Islam. Let’s ignore the scandal of the silence on the child grooming gangs after all what are principles when parliamentary seats are in the balance. The left pride themselves as being forthright supporters of feminism and LGBT rights but seem silent on those rights where they are challenged by Muslims in the UK.

While we are on the subject, how would YOU label Johnson and Rees Mogg?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 10 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I assume the thrust of your original post was ..
You can and invariably do use assumption to ascribe whatever motivation you like to my posts but that does mean your assumptions bear any relation to reality.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:to draw out those who have concerns about immigration in the UK to then hit them with the zinger “but you are an immigrant here!!!!”
Johnson's speech was about a specific issue with immigration in the UK, namely that of failure of immigrants to 'integrate'. Yes I did seek to draw parallels with this issue in the UK and here. It was not some attempt at a 'dirty leftist trick'. It was an attempt at serious discussion about such issues, specifically because I do understand that people have concerns over these issues.

You can have 'concerns about immigration' without being racist. But racists DO exist and every single one of them will also have 'concerns about immigration'. I do not think just because there are many who have concerns about immigration who are not racist and some times these people are unfairly labelled as racist, we should simply deny racism exits.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote: In the UK, Somalian immigrant’s standard of English is notoriously poor which no doubt is a major reason for the 60% unemployment amongst men. Which leads to the question what contribution do they make to the UK. Much as it would be a utopian ideal to take in every economic migrant in the world and improve their lives it is not practical or affordable.
This to me typifies what I see as 'muddled thinking' over these issues that is I think quite common. There is a difference between an 'economic migrant' and someone seeking asylum. How many of the Somali's , with notoriously poor English skills in your stats are in the UK as people seeking asylum or granted asylum vs economic migrants ? For me the stat I would like to see is what is the % employment rate amongst Somali immigrants (those who have been granted asylum or economic migrants) in the UK of the 2nd and 3rd generations ? I strongly suspect that the unemployment rate in this group would not be particularly different from the national average, just as their 'standard of English' will also not be atypical either. What do you think the employment rate (or standard of English) was of 1st generation Jewish immigrants into the UK leading up to, during and immediately after WW2 was ? Do you think it might have been higher than the UK national average ? Will you label me 'antisemitic' for even asking such a question ?

As much as you get frustrated at those who just label anyone with concerns over immigration as racist (something I personal do NOT do) so too I find it frustrating that others label anyone who does not agree with their views on immigration as 'wanting the UK to accept any and all economic migrants from any where in the world without restriction' (something you personally DO do). To say I think the issue of lack of integration of migrants is one that applies in essence to 1st generation migrants and not 2nd or subsequent generations is not to say 'I think the UK should let anyone come and live in the UK legally without any let or hindrance'.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:It would make far more sense to try to improve their lot in their original countries
Who disagrees with this ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:which I think we attempt to do with our generous foreign aid. The British people have also been generous in their support of charitable efforts in places such as Africa although that is thrown in our faces as us being a white saviour.
Whatever you think of how generous we are in terms of foreign aid and charity donations the fact is we are not and have not done a very good job in terms of 'improving the lot in their home countries' if you measure it in terms of how many people there are around the world who have been driven from their homes as a result of war and famine and other factors. For me if you are serious about trying to improve the conditions for people in their own country such they are not driven to migrate form such places , then you need to talk about Britain's foreign policy rather than just their foreign aid budget.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:The problem that Johnson can’t allude to, for fear of being labelled a fascist, although he and Rees Mogg are already being tarred as such, is the problem the UK is having with Islam. Forget that the UK and Europe are Christian countries they are, for the most part, secular. As is North Cyprus, which I would imagine is a big reason many of us moved here.
I just do not think there is a problem with Islam, or UK citizens who follow Islam in any sort of sense that is actually generic to followers of Islam in the UK. I am aware that significant numbers of people do perceive such a problem but I just do not agree with them. I think part of the reason why people have such opinions is down to the fact that if a person who is Islamic commits some terrible and heinous act, then they are reported as being Islamic where as when someone who is white and christian commits such an act race and religion are simply irrelevant. There are those (and I am NOT one of them) who claim there is a problem with Jews in the UK, that they do not 'integrate' as they should and hold and place allegiance to things like Judaism and Zionism above any allegiance that have to the UK and its ideals and values and that this is a problem that needs to be dealt with. Do you think it is a problematic that views and opinions such as these can not be stated openly by UK politicians and can only be alluded to ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Islam does not seem to be fit easily into secular Britain.
I just do not agree with this. I think extreme radical Islam does not fit easily into secular Britain, just as extreme radical Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism or any other ism does not fit easily into secular Britain. It is the 'extreme radical' bit that I think does not fit easily into secular Britain, not the religion bit as far as I am concerned.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote: My main truck with the left in the UK ...
You truck is, as far as I can see, always and only ever with the left in the UK. I have yet to see you have any truck with anything or anyone in the UK other than 'the left'. Which is what makes it easy to feel like you are driven just as much by 'ideology' as those on the left you accuse of being so driven. It is also why it can feel very frustrating debating with you.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:While we are on the subject, how would YOU label Johnson and Rees Mogg?
I would label them as politicians, which for me is not a particularly complementary label but a fair and accurate one I would claim none the less.

User avatar
Groucho
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3224
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2012 2:43 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 11 of 70 in Discussion

Post by Groucho »

Erol, I agree that for some members of this board to bemoan UK immigration and not see the irony in that view given their status here is a bit sauce for the goose.

Counter argument:-

Language is an issue for many immigrants to the UK because unlike English which I think is widely spoken worldwide - (very luckily for us) , many tongues and dialects of other countries do not easily get understood in the UK to any meaningful degree... This is often to our shame - even French, German and Spanish speakers would find it difficult to be understood given the UK's parlous record on teaching second languages.

Having said that, we have to accept that English is the UK's lingua franca, That said - some UK citizens born and bred have very poor English and this is also a blot on the landscape...

If we accept that understanding is important then there maybe a barrier to integration and what used to be called ghettos could appear to all intents and purposes be established for first generation immigrants if they huddle together for mutual understanding and culture.

Of course their offspring generally learn English as they receive state education - unless, and this could be an issue - the first generation insist on their children having separate schooling in their mother tongue and their own systems of law like Sharia courts. Then proper integration, I would suggest, could appear to be stymied.

How much of this actually exists and how much is the stuff of propaganda would need examination.







.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 12 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote: You can have 'concerns about immigration' without being racist. But racists DO exist and every single one of them will also have 'concerns about immigration'. I do not think just because there are many who have concerns about immigration who are not racist and some times these people are unfairly labelled as racist, we should simply deny racism exits.
Do you go on twitter? On twitter it is full of accusations that anybody voting for UKIP, the Brexit Party and or Brexit is racist/fascist. I’m more than happy to plaster up tweets from half of Corbyn’s cabinet if you like?
Yes we do have racists in Britain. A tiny percentage. The high point for the National Front’s vote was less than 200,000. I doubt every one of those was a fascist or racist I’m sure there were a fair few protest voters thrown to them.

BNP got 36,000 votes in 1997, 47,000 in 2001, 193,000 in 2005 and 564,000 in 2010. The 564,000 is the largest they or any far right party has ever won. That in an election where votes were going everywhere and we ended up with a hung parliament. It was after the financial crash. It was after we found out just how many million immigrants Labour had imported and it was the first election after the terror attacks in Britain started with July 7. Absolute perfect conditions for a far right party to get a significant vote.
They got less than 2%.
I would say there are around 50,000 that the BNP could rely on to vote for them. Assuming it’s not Peterborough that means that people can vote anonymously and be a bigot. That’s about as many skateboarders as there are in Britain. So if you think there are legs in racism then you must also think skateboarding is the new hot craze so buy yourself a skateboard shop. Just don’t ask me to invest.

So as far as a racism problem in Britain exists, it really doesn’t. That battle has been won, you are bayoneting the wounded. But keep covering up things like the child grooming gangs in the name of political expediency and you’ll grow racists, that’s guaranteed.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 13 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Islam does not seem to be fit easily into secular Britain.
I just do not agree with this. I think extreme radical Islam does not fit easily into secular Britain, just as extreme radical Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism or any other ism does not fit easily into secular Britain. It is the 'extreme radical' bit that I think does not fit easily into secular Britain, not the religion bit as far as I am concerned.
Let’s concentrate on Christianity as that is the main religion in Britain and Hinduism, Buddhism and Judaism have zero chance of supplementing it in any part of Britain. I’m not an expert but to my knowledge Christians follow the New Testament which concentrates on the life of Jesus. At no point in that book, to my knowledge, does Jesus come across as anything other than a man of peace and kindness. That’s not to say that Christians don’t do horrendous things, but there is nothing in the New Testament that they can point to that justifies their crimes.
True I don’t believe The New Testament speaks in favour of homosexuality, as far as I know it doesn’t mention homosexuals at all. But the underlying theme of Jesus is love thy neighbor. So if you live next to a hairdresser and interior decorator called Nigel and Tarquin and want to stay true to the NT, be nice to them.
The Koran however seems to be full of violent imagery and Muhammed appears to be a warrior/chief.
OK let’s take out the bits of getting 70 virgins if you kill unbelievers as being something that radicalists will jump on whereas normal Muslims will call that out as insane.
That still leaves us with women being subservient, polygamy and anti-homosexuality. I don’t for one minute believe those protesting outside that school in Birmingham are going to blow up the next plane they go on but if I was looking for a location for a gay pride march I’d certainly avoid their road.
So where are the same people who will go on marches to enable an ex truck driver called Malcolm who has changed his name to Michelle to use the same changing room as my granddaughter standing up and saying hold on Mr Islam you need to move out of the dark ages with those views?
The silence of the (David) Lammy there.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 14 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote: Whatever you think of how generous we are in terms of foreign aid and charity donations the fact is we are not and have not done a very good job in terms of 'improving the lot in their home countries' if you measure it in terms of how many people there are around the world who have been driven from their homes as a result of war and famine and other factors. For me if you are serious about trying to improve the conditions for people in their own country such they are not driven to migrate form such places , then you need to talk about Britain's foreign policy rather than just their foreign aid budget.
I’m guessing you are going to go down the, we had an Empire so we have to make restitution for the rest of our days. Because of our colonialism we left these countries unable to cope?
It’s a good excuse. I believe my great great great great grandfather was bullied at school which is the reason I didn’t get as many O levels as many others.
Ethiopia was never colonised and they aren’t doing too great. There are a 100 million Ethiopians, that will take some integrating. We obviously can’t send them money as that will be us playing the white savior, so what do we do?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 15 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:On twitter it is full of accusations that anybody voting for UKIP, the Brexit Party and or Brexit is racist/fascist.
Can you find a single 'post' by me on any platform where I have said that anyone voting for UKIP, Brexit party or who voted to leave in 2016 is racist ? No you can not. You can find countless 'post' where I have explicitly refuted such accusations. Yes you can. Can I find any posts by you where you have said or implied anybody with a more liberal view on immigration that you, or who voted remain in 2016 or votes for Labour advocates 'having no immigration controls in the UK what so ever' ? Yes you can find such. So who exactly are you 'debating' with here ? Me or those who do claim that anyone who supports Brexit is racist ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote: So as far as a racism problem in Britain exists, it really doesn’t. That battle has been won, you are bayoneting the wounded.
So what do you think of the claim "So as far as a antisemitism problem in Britain exists, it really doesn’t. That battle has been won, you are bayoneting the wounded." ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:But keep covering up things like the child grooming gangs in the name of political expediency and you’ll grow racists, that’s guaranteed.
So you are accusing me of covering up things like the child grooming gangs are you ? Keep using (exploiting) things like the child grooming gangs to support you political agenda of 'anti leftism' and the chances are the lessons that should be learnt from such failures will not be learnt.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I’m not an expert but to my knowledge Christians follow the New Testament which concentrates on the life of Jesus.
Radical extreme Christians do not consider the 'new testament' supplants and replaces the 'old testament'. In fact not many 'average' Chrisitians believe this. They consider that all of the bible, with all of its contradictions is the word of God. You can be an 'eye for an eye' Christian or you can be a 'turn the other cheek' Christian. Both are equally Christian viewpoints and both have 'support' in the bible. If someone was to try and classify all Christians as 'eye for an eye' only, I would be suspicious of their motives. Just as you trying to portray Christianity as relating only to the 'new testament' makes me suspicious.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:At no point in that book, to my knowledge, does Jesus come across as anything other than a man of peace and kindness. That’s not to say that Christians don’t do horrendous things, but there is nothing in the New Testament that they can point to that justifies their crimes.
But there is much in the old testament that is the anti thesis of a doctrine of 'peace and kindness' and people who have committed horrendous crimes can and do point to these things to justify their crimes. Such selective use of what is in the bible to justify horrendous acts and crimes is not the exception, it is the rule.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:The Koran however seems to be full of violent imagery ...
No more or less so than the bible is. Ignorance and or inability to be 'objective' because of 'ideology' is not the same thing as reality. One of the basic tenants of Judaism is that Jews and only Jews are God's chosen people, that they are superior to all other people in the eyes of God. Does that mean that Juadism is a 'problematic' religion where as Christianity, that does not say this, is not ?
EnjoyingTheSun wrote: and Muhammed appears to be a warrior/chief
Muhammed was a 'warrior prophet' just as Elisha (and many others) in Christian tradition were also 'warrior prophets'.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I’m guessing you are going to go down the, we had an Empire so we have to make restitution for the rest of our days.
To me there is no doubt that the economic pre eminence that the UK still enjoys today is intimately related to our history of economy built on slavery, colonial conquest and subjugation of other peoples and empire. Whilst I do not believe the sins of the father are the sins of the son, I do recognise the reality that the gains derived from the sins of the father can accrue to the sons. In any case none of this was the point I was making, they are just responses to your 'guess' and 'assumption' , driven by your ideology, as to what point I was making.

The point I was making, the one you have 'swerved' by 'guessing' (wrongly) what I was saying is as follows. If the objective is to for the UK to try and influence things such that people do not feel compelled or fell less compelled to migrate from the place they were born in to, then what we do or do not spend in foreign aid is near irrelevant vs the foreign policy choices we make. This to me so plainly obvious that t is embarrassing to have to have to say it explicitly. If you want to believe how much we do or do not spend on foreign aid has more impact on how many people feel compelled to migrate than the foreign policy choices we made, to give one example. in regards to Iraq during the gulf wars, then go ahead and believe that. I think the very idea is plainly nonsense.

Anyway I do think there is a 'limit' to how much issues like the ones we have been having can be sensibly discussed via a medium like this forum and I think we are close or even in places possibly over that limit, so do forgive me should I choose to not continue such debate here.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 16 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote: Can you find a single 'post' by me on any platform where I have said that anyone voting for UKIP, Brexit party or who voted to leave in 2016 is racist ?
Operative words are on twitter. I am happy to supply copious links from Labour MPs if you wish
erol wrote: So what do you think of the claim "So as far as a antisemitism problem in Britain exists, it really doesn’t. That battle has been won, you are bayoneting the wounded." ?
I thought it was but Mr Corbyn and Momentum have bought it back. Personally I don't actually think they are AS as such. I think it is because they are totally anti American and view Israel as America's puppet in the Middle East, hence America is bad, Israel is bad and that morphs into Jews are bad. They also have the maths of our political map. There are approximately ten times the Muslim voters than there are Jewish voters so a little AS is never going to be a vote loser. Unless of course you think that Williamson should have been re-admitted?
erol wrote: So you are accusing me of covering up things like the child grooming gangs are you ? Keep using (exploiting) things like the child grooming gangs to support you political agenda of 'anti leftism' and the chances are the lessons that should be learnt from such failures will not be learnt.
I'm not accusing you. Do you not think there was an attempt to cover it up? I think it speaks volumes that you are uncomfortable talking about it and wish to move on ASAP. Tommy Robinson is a despicable racist, no argument there. He was raising the subject of these grooming gangs over a decade ago to the derision of the media. Now he has been proved right, it doesn’t harm his case does it? Maybe more people will be willing to listen to him in the future. Its a horrendous thought but....
erol wrote: Radical extreme Christians do not consider the 'new testament' supplants and replaces the 'old testament'. In fact not many 'average' Chrisitians believe this. They consider that all of the bible, with all of its contradictions is the word of God. You can be an 'eye for an eye' Christian or you can be a 'turn the other cheek' Christian. Both are equally Christian viewpoints and both have 'support' in the bible. If someone was to try and classify all Christians as 'eye for an eye' only, I would be suspicious of their motives. Just as you trying to portray Christianity as relating only to the 'new testament' makes me suspicious.
Again you are mixing fly "ooops" from pepper. I deliberately said that even if we ignore the parts of the Quran that the extreme Muslims focus in on there is still enough there that goes against the basic culture of the UK. You wish to keep raising The Old Testament because obviously there is more fire and brimstone in it. Maybe that was why it was superseded? The world moves on? Good luck updating the Quran without getting killed. Also my memory of the Old Testament is it was almost a book of what happened whereas the Quran reads more as a how to do manual.
erol wrote: One of the basic tenants of Judaism is that Jews and only Jews are God's chosen people, that they are superior to all other people in the eyes of God. Does that mean that Juadism is a 'problematic' religion where as Christianity, that does not say this, is not ?
I’m no expert on any religion but I’ve yet to see one that says please follow ours but we do have to admit that that other religion is a bit better My reading of The Quran as the religion of peace seems to read that there will be peace in the world when we all follow the Quran which isn’t quite as peace and love.
erol wrote: To me there is no doubt that the economic pre-eminence that the UK still enjoys today is intimately related to our history of economy built on slavery, colonial conquest and subjugation of other peoples and empire.
Total piffle but if you want to feel guilty about something that happened hundreds of years ago feel free. My Mum and Dad were working class so if there is any treasure that was passed down to them from our glory days they certainly kept it well hidden. Also you can’t have it both ways here. Some of the 1% who have all the wealth and won’t ever pass it on must logically be the descendants of those who made hay during the Empire days? Well apparently they aren’t passing it on to the likes of us so why should I feel obliged to pay some sort of compensation with money I never had?
erol wrote: If you want to believe how much we do or do not spend on foreign aid has more impact on how many people feel compelled to migrate than the foreign policy choices we made, to give one example. in regards to Iraq during the gulf wars, then go ahead and believe that. I think the very idea is plainly nonsense.
I agree there is no way we should have got involved in Iraq and obviously those Iraqis must have been having the most wonderful time under Saddam Hussain and should all be allowed to go to the UK. It must have been like Christmas everyday under Saddam and Uday etc. Simple maths, if I give ten grand to an Ethiopian to spend in Ethiopia it is going to go a lot further than if I give it to him to live in London. To argue against THAT is nonsense.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 17 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

As I said before for me I have reached the limit as to how such issues can sensibly be discussed with yourself on a medium like this forum. However
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Tommy Robinson is a despicable racist, no argument there. He was raising the subject of these grooming gangs over a decade ago to the derision of the media. Now he has been proved right, ...
The idea that Tommy Robinson was going around warning that there were such asian grooming gangs and that they were getting away with it years before such were exposed in cases like the Rochdale one and no one listened to him is I believe just fiction. If he was doing this before such cases were exposed, instead of just exploiting such after they were exposed then you will need to provide some actual evidence that this was the case. You just claiming it was the case does not cut any mustard with me.

There indeed were people warning that such things were happening for years before they were exposed and who were ignored but Tommy Robinson was not one of these people. People like Sara Rowbotham (Labour party member and councillor as it happens) who "made 181 referrals detailing the abuse and sexual grooming of young people between 2005 and 2011" and who were ignored. Nor does Sara Rowbotham make multi million pound income by presenting herself as a populist 'exposer of asian based sex grooming gangs'.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 18 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
The idea that Tommy Robinson was going around warning that there were such asian grooming gangs and that they were getting away with it years before such were exposed in cases like the Rochdale one and no one listened to him is I believe just fiction. If he was doing this before such cases were exposed, instead of just exploiting such after they were exposed then you will need to provide some actual evidence that this was the case. You just claiming it was the case does not cut any mustard with me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd3ZFsJ ... 1562599218

This is him bringing it up to be slapped down by Paxman 8 years ago.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 19 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
There indeed were people warning that such things were happening for years before they were exposed and who were ignored but Tommy Robinson was not one of these people. People like Sara Rowbotham (Labour party member and councillor as it happens) who "made 181 referrals detailing the abuse and sexual grooming of young people between 2005 and 2011" and who were ignored. Nor does Sara Rowbotham make multi million pound income by presenting herself as a populist 'exposer of asian based sex grooming gangs'.
I have no desire to promote Tommy Robinson and have no pretensions that he cares in the slightest about these poor girls but he isn't really the point here, making him into a prophet or martyr are. Why were these warnings consistently ignored?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 20 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:I have no desire to promote Tommy Robinson and have no pretensions that he cares in the slightest about these poor girls but he isn't really the point here, making him into a prophet or martyr are.
You say you have no desire to promote Tommy Robinson yet when you present a fiction that he was warning for years that there were such grooming gangs that were getting away it and no one listened to him and if they has they could have been exposed sooner and before they had been exposed by anyone else, that is exactly what you are doing. Promoting him based on claims that are not even true in the first place. I am afraid for me actions do speak louder than words.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Why were these warnings consistently ignored?
Which warnings are you talking about ? The fictional Tommy Robinson ones ? These were not listened to because they did not exist. If you mean why were Sara Rowbotham's warnings not listened to then there are multiple reasons why.

One of those reasons were about fears that because the perpetrators were predominantly of UK/ Asian background, prosecution could lead to racial tensions and could be exploited by people who were racists and had an agenda of increasing racial tension in the UK and vilifying Islam generically, just as Tommy Robinson has done and continues to do so since they were exposed.

Another reason why they were not listened to was the victims were deemed 'not credible' and were generally perceived as 'troublesome','damaged goods' and 'bad uns' and had themselves chosen to engage in such activities because that was what they were like. This kind of categorising of the victims as not being victims because they were 'asking for it' leading to things not being exposed until long after they should have been is a common theme in the many child sex abuse scandals that have not involved predominately uk/asian perpetrators, like those seen amongst christian priests to give one example.

There were other factors as well, like lack of proper co ordination and communication between various agencies and entities leading to things 'falling through the cracks' between these agencies.

When someone like Tommy Robinson only ever talks about the first reason and makes out that this is the sole or major reason these things were allowed to continue for as long as they did before being exposed and exploits that single reason to further a pre existing racist anti Islam agenda, then yes I do conclude that he has little genuine interest in the issue beyond his ability to exploit it to further his own anti Islam agenda. Just as when you do likewise it is hard to not conclude likewise.

WotNoDeeds
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 751
Joined: Tue 24 Apr 2012 3:50 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 21 of 70 in Discussion

Post by WotNoDeeds »

Boris Johnstone is tinkering round the edges of the immigration question by suggesting that all immigrants should learn English. Certainly immigrants in the workplace should have a reasonable command of English. Not so sure that its so essential for retired UK expats in the TRNC to be fluent in Turkish but a basic knowledge is useful. The whole subject of UK immigration needs an in-depth investigation. The present rate of immigration into the UK is unsustainable. It will be interesting to see what the immigration policy of the various political parties will be in the event of a general election. Not that any party has kept its manifesto promises on immigration. Much interesting information on immigration figures can be found on https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/

kerry 6138
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon 05 Oct 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 22 of 70 in Discussion

Post by kerry 6138 »

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_YQ94jFg_4A

Tommy Robinson talking to the Oxford Union

Erol" Which warnings are you talking about ? The fictional Tommy Robinson ones ? These were not listened to because they did not exist. If you mean why were Sara Rowbotham's warnings not listened to then there are multiple reasons why.

How do you know they didn't exist ? if Sara sitting on Police and Social Services committee 's was not listened to for multiple reasons how do you think a young activists complaints to the local council and Police and leaflet campaigning was going to fair any better.

Racist is a word used often against Tommy Robinson but for someone who is tied to the dock on a short elastic band that is one of the convictions he seems to avoid in court but not the media.

Erol" Nor does Sara Rowbotham make multi million pound income by presenting herself as a populist 'exposer of asian based sex grooming gangs'.

Where is the evidence of TR millions , you cant even buy his books on Amazon but you can get a copy of Mien Kampf ?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 23 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

kerry 6138 wrote:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_YQ94jFg_4A

Tommy Robinson talking to the Oxford Union
In 2015, which is after such gangs were already exposed , which is my point. The idea he was warning about such things before they were exposed (rather than seeking to exploit them after such exposure) is not true. However if I am wrong, if there is evidence that he was warning about such things before they were exposed, then please provide the evidence for such. Him talking about the issue in 2015 is not such evidence.
kerry 6138 wrote:How do you know they didn't exist ? if Sara sitting on Police and Social Services committee 's was not listened to for multiple reasons how do you think a young activists complaints to the local council and Police and leaflet campaigning was going to fair any better.
I believe they did not exist because if they did there would be evidence to show he was warning such things before these gangs were exposed and people would be making a big deal of it and showing the proof. I have yet to see any proof that he was talking about these issue before these gangs were exposed but I do see the claim that he was doing so quite often and without any proof.
kerry 6138 wrote:Where is the evidence of TR millions , you cant even buy his books on Amazon but you can get a copy of Mien Kampf ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Rob ... al_support

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 24 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

Off topic really but it is being reported that Tommy Robinson has 'begged' the USA to grant him asylum. All sorts of ironies there it seems to me ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 96166.html

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 25 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

Naz Shah
Naz Shah
erol wrote:
One of those reasons were about fears that because the perpetrators were predominantly of UK/ Asian background, prosecution could lead to racial tensions and could be exploited by people who were racists and had an agenda of increasing racial tension in the UK and vilifying Islam generically, just as Tommy Robinson has done and continues to do so since they were exposed.
Well Naz Shah seems to think diversity conquers all

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 26 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
Another reason why they were not listened to was the victims were deemed 'not credible' and were generally perceived as 'troublesome','damaged goods' and 'bad uns' and had themselves chosen to engage in such activities because that was what they were like. This kind of categorising of the victims as not being victims because they were 'asking for it' leading to things not being exposed until long after they should have been is a common theme in the many child sex abuse scandals that have not involved predominately uk/asian perpetrators, like those seen amongst christian priests to give one example.
The difference with catholic priests is they have positions of influence and the people at the top always look after their own. The animals in Rotherham etc etc etc etc etc were mini cab drivers and kebab shop owners

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 27 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
There were other factors as well, like lack of proper co ordination and communication between various agencies and entities leading to things 'falling through the cracks' between these agencies.
Falling between the cracks
According to the Jay and Casey reports there were at least 1400 children abused over 12 years. What happens in those communities is authority is delegated to community leaders. Ironically just how the colonies used to run. As Casey explained deputy leader Jahangir Akhtar used to be able to deliver! According to Casey, Akhtar and Mahroof Hussain suppressed the abuse 'for fear of upsetting community relations.' Akhtar's cousin Arshid Hussain was named by many victims.

Everyone know's exactly what has happened here. We have communities that rely heavily on the Muslim vote. Probably numbering at least a dozen although it would be easier to just see where the cases of abuse occurred to get a true number. That dozen seats would be the difference between getting a majority at an election or not. So the Muslim vote is delivered by the community leaders, looking at Peterborough, in a variety of ways, and everyone turns a blind eye. Whats thousands of minors being raped when we are talking millions of votes? As Naz Shah would say, they should just keep their mouths shut.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 28 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote: Well Naz Shah seems to think diversity conquers all
If Naz Shah or indeed anyone argues that cases like these should not be prosecuted in the name of 'diversity' or anything else then I would condemn such comments unreservedly.

However the idea that this is her position is far from as clear as you selective snapshot suggests. Naz Shah claims the like of the post, that itself had been made on a parody twitter account, was a mistake and was rectified within minutes of the mistake being noticed.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:This is him bringing it up to be slapped down by Paxman 8 years ago.
From October 2011. This is after the Rochdale abuse ring had already been exposed. The start of prosecuting these people for these crimes began in 2009.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 29 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote: Falling between the cracks
No one who is genuinely concerned with how these offences took so long to be recognized and stopped and the offenders brought to justice would deny or ignore the issue that 'fear of upsetting community relations' played. Nor would anyone who is genuinely concerned with how these offences took so long to be recognized and stopped and the offenders brought to justice would deny or ignore the issue of the victims being ignored.

Anyone who talks only of the first issue, says or creates the impression that it is the only 'lesson to be learnt' and ignores and does not talk about the second issue, should rightly raise suspicion as to if they are genuinely concerned with how these offences took so long to be recognized and stopped and the offenders brought to justice or are just seeking to exploit that reality to further some other agenda. This is not rocket science. It is common sense. Tommy Robinson is one clear case of this. You ETS, based on your posts here and the number of times you have raised the first issue only and given that to date (to the best of my memory) you have never mentioned the second issue or recognized it as a factor even when other have raised it, in my opinion also merit such suspicion.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 30 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
However the idea that this is her position is far from as clear as you selective snapshot suggests. Naz Shah claims the like of the post, that itself had been made on a parody twitter account, was a mistake and was rectified within minutes of the mistake being noticed.
Sure you can like something by mistake, but retweet it too? Wouldn't it be fairer to think that is her true view and then thought whoops let the cat out of the bag abort abort?
erol wrote:
From October 2011. This is after the Rochdale abuse ring had already been exposed. The start of prosecuting these people for these crimes began in 2009.
Very difficult due to censorship to find much but it is clear that what was happening in Rochdale was well known and the EDL had a big presence there so Robinson finding out early and trying to take advantage of it isn't unlikely. As you said it was 2011 and prosecutions had been going on for two years but Paxman was downplaying it

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 31 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote: Falling between the cracks
No one who is genuinely concerned with how these offences took so long to be recognized and stopped and the offenders brought to justice would deny or ignore the issue that 'fear of upsetting community relations' played. Nor would anyone who is genuinely concerned with how these offences took so long to be recognized and stopped and the offenders brought to justice would deny or ignore the issue of the victims being ignored.

Anyone who talks only of the first issue, says or creates the impression that it is the only 'lesson to be learnt' and ignores and does not talk about the second issue, should rightly raise suspicion as to if they are genuinely concerned with how these offences took so long to be recognized and stopped and the offenders brought to justice or are just seeking to exploit that reality to further some other agenda. This is not rocket science. It is common sense. Tommy Robinson is one clear case of this. You ETS, based on your posts here and the number of times you have raised the first issue only and given that to date (to the best of my memory) you have never mentioned the second issue or recognized it as a factor even when other have raised it, in my opinion also merit such suspicion.
My original point was that to censor these crimes only assists Robinson and I stand by that.
Also the lack of integration both culturally and geographically has been a big part of this problem but lets wrap up those 12-15 seats and turn a blind eye eh?
But lets not give you the opportunity to throw out the Racist or Islamaphobe card for raising child abuse. So that's child abuse, pedophilia, rape, homophobia and mysogeny that we need to accept in the name of diversity, anything else?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 32 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:
erol wrote: However the idea that this is her position is far from as clear as you selective snapshot suggests. Naz Shah claims the like of the post, that itself had been made on a parody twitter account, was a mistake and was rectified within minutes of the mistake being noticed.
Sure you can like something by mistake, but retweet it too? Wouldn't it be fairer to think that is her true view and then thought whoops let the cat out of the bag abort abort?
Yes that is possible. I am not the one who presented her view as clearly and undoubtedly being 'such cases should be suppressed in the name of diversity' - you are the one who did that. You did not mention the fact that she claims it was an accident but that you do not believe her claim. You did not mention that she has since explicitly said that is not her view and that you think she is just saying that because of the 'optics'. You just presented partial evidence that could only suggest to a third party with no extra knowledge that this unequivocally was her stated view. It is near impossible for me to believe you did not do so 'with intent'.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Very difficult due to censorship to find much but it is clear that what was happening in Rochdale was well known and the EDL had a big presence there so Robinson finding out early and trying to take advantage of it isn't unlikely. As you said it was 2011 and prosecutions had been going on for two years but Paxman was downplaying it
Your original claim, as far as I understood it correctly, was that Tommy Robinson was warning about such things for years before they were exposed and he was not listened to. I did and do not think that is true. Nor has anyone to date provided any evidence that this was the case. SO now you have fallen back on 'well there is no evidence this was the case I can give you but common sense must tell you that I am right even though no evidence can be found'. Well I am sorry but I do not find that convincing at all. I think the reality is a lot simpler than that. I think the reality is that Tommy Robinson was NOT warning about such things BEFORE they were exposed, only seeking to exploit them after they were exposed and you chose to imply otherwise because it suited your agenda to do so.
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:My original point was that to censor these crimes only assists Robinson and I stand by that.
And who disagrees with this ? Certainly not me and I am the person you are discussing these things with. If you want to just continue to argue with me about things I have not said whilst continuing to ignore large swathes of things I have said, then forgive me if I do not see that as a particularly interesting discussion to engage with.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 33 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote: I am not the one who presented her view as clearly and undoubtedly being 'such cases should be suppressed in the name of diversity' - you are the one who did that. You did not mention the fact that she claims it was an accident but that you do not believe her claim. You did not mention that she has since explicitly said that is not her view and that you think she is just saying that because of the 'optics'. You just presented partial evidence that could only suggest to a third party with no extra knowledge that this unequivocally was her stated view. It is near impossible for me to believe you did not do so 'with intent'.
No fair enough someone tweets "those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths. For the good of diversity." You don't argue against the tweet, which could be viewed as agreement, no you like it and then in a separate action then retweet it to your 30,000 followers. I guess I can't clearly and undoubtedly say that she was in agreement but I have to say on the balance of probabilities she was in favour.
But forgive and forget, we have all done it. You've had a few drinks, read Mein Kampf and give it a good review on Amazon and recommend it for everyone to read. It would only be the most cynical that actually believe you approve.
Anyhow no harm done it seems it has been swept under the carpet and Labour are concentrating on going after that fascist Sarah Champion.
It the end of the day 14,000 raped girls against 140,000 potential votes its a no brainer.

kerry 6138
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon 05 Oct 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 34 of 70 in Discussion

Post by kerry 6138 »

Erol by extension of your logic Jeremy Corbyn is a multimillionaire with is trade union sponsorship and his wages from Iranian Press tv.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Corbyn

Drug squad officers in 2003 claimed that Asian gangs were actively seeking to corner the heroin market.[82] Examples of Pakistani drug gangs in the United Kingdom outside of the major urban centres can be found in Bedford and Luton,

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJn ... ngdom.html

Erol" When someone like Tommy Robinson only ever talks about the first reason and makes out that this is the sole or major reason these things were allowed to continue for as long as they did before being exposed and exploits that single reason to further a pre existing racist anti Islam agenda, then yes I do conclude that he has little genuine interest in the issue beyond his ability to exploit it to further his own anti Islam agenda

. Robinson told the audience he was not allowed to talk about certain issues because he was out on prison licence. He said, "I regain my freedom of speech on the 22 July 2015." He criticised "politicians, the media and police for failing to tackle certain criminal activities because of the fear of being labelled Islamophobic

You maybe guilty of reading what you want to see

Erol" Him talking about the issue in 2015 is not such evidence

In the spirit of know your enemy if you'd watched the video he talked about his school day's and the events leading to his foray into activism in Luton.

Strange how the two main keyboard debaters on here hate to watch YouTube videos if it doesn't fit their narrative.

3.00 mins in TR talks about his cousins experience with asian drug gangs and Police failures
10.00 mins in talks about authorities playing down religious / racial tension.
4.00 TR talks about religious divide not racial divide at school
8.00 mins plays BBC local news clips reporting racial tension
16.00 mins TR passes round copies of leaflets he produced in 2004 (Edl formed 2009) complaining of police / authorities inaction at stopping extremist recruitment and drug and pimping gangs operating in Luton.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 35 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

kerry 6138 wrote:You maybe guilty of reading what you want to see
We are ALL guilty of doing this to some degree or other. There are those, like me that know this, acknowledge it and do their best to minimise it as much as possible and then there are those who believe it is something that only other people (and always people they disagree with never those they agree with) do but that they do not. To me as far as I can tell you appear to be in the later category and not the former.

You see evidence in the Jeremy Corbyn article that you linked to , that he earns multi million income in his role as Labour party MP and current leader and see that evidence as comparable to the evidence in the Tommy Robinson link I posted that says explicitly that he has earnt multi million pound incomes as a result of his 'work' as a anti Islam demagogue. I see no such thing. So who , in this specific example is really 'seeing what they want to see' more than the other ?

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 36 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Everyone know's exactly what has happened here. We have communities that rely heavily on the Muslim vote. Probably numbering at least a dozen although it would be easier to just see where the cases of abuse occurred to get a true number. That dozen seats would be the difference between getting a majority at an election or not. So the Muslim vote is delivered by the community leaders, looking at Peterborough, in a variety of ways, and everyone turns a blind eye. Whats thousands of minors being raped when we are talking millions of votes? As Naz Shah would say, they should just keep their mouths shut.
Your narrative makes no sense to me in so far as the claim is these things were ignored and covered up and allowed to go on specifically to gain votes for Labour. The thing you appear to claim 'everyone knows''. Some of the victims of these crimes reported them directly to the police and they were not believed, not deemed 'credible'. Now it is possible that the reason or one of the reasons why the police chose to not believe these victims is that they knew the accused were from an ethnic minority group and feared been seen as or called racist. However what is not credible to me is that the police chose to not believe these victims at that time because they wanted to secure votes from the ethic community that the perpetrators were mainly from for the Labour party. It just makes no sense at all. The only way you making such claims makes any sense to me is to conclude that you place 'trying to kick the Labour party, leftist, those with different views to you on immigration' above any real concern for understanding what went wrong in these cases so that we can collectively try and ensure it does not happen in the future.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 37 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:Everyone know's exactly what has happened here. We have communities that rely heavily on the Muslim vote. Probably numbering at least a dozen although it would be easier to just see where the cases of abuse occurred to get a true number. That dozen seats would be the difference between getting a majority at an election or not. So the Muslim vote is delivered by the community leaders, looking at Peterborough, in a variety of ways, and everyone turns a blind eye. Whats thousands of minors being raped when we are talking millions of votes? As Naz Shah would say, they should just keep their mouths shut.
Your narrative makes no sense to me in so far as the claim is these things were ignored and covered up and allowed to go on specifically to gain votes for Labour. The thing you appear to claim 'everyone knows''. Some of the victims of these crimes reported them directly to the police and they were not believed, not deemed 'credible'. Now it is possible that the reason or one of the reasons why the police chose to not believe these victims is that they knew the accused were from an ethnic minority group and feared been seen as or called racist. However what is not credible to me is that the police chose to not believe these victims at that time because they wanted to secure votes from the ethic community that the perpetrators were mainly from for the Labour party. It just makes no sense at all. The only way you making such claims makes any sense to me is to conclude that you place 'trying to kick the Labour party, leftist, those with different views to you on immigration' above any real concern for understanding what went wrong in these cases so that we can collectively try and ensure it does not happen in the future.
The police and local government in these areas deal with the local community leaders. Ironically just like the good old colonial days. This has the effect that these communities are self-policing. That's not a narrative that is a fact as evidenced by the Jay and Casey reports. That said I'm sure if the conservatives were guaranteed 73% of that vote, or over 100%, if postal votes are counted they would also tread lightly.
We also have the revelation from Chief Crown Prosecutor Mr Nazir Afzal that in 2008 when the Labour Government under Prime Minister Gordon Brown, and Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, sent-out a circular to all the British police forces’; stating that “...as far as these young girls who are being exploited in towns and cities, we believe they have made an informed choice about their sexual behavior and therefore it is not for you police officers to get involved in.”
So I think you would have to blind to ignore that there is an ongoing problem here. What is causing it I’m not 100% sure although do have some theories. So we ignore what is going on and let it fester until it explodes as it inevitably will or we address it. Not to do so gives the likes of Tommy Robinson a window of opportunity.
Which leads us back to the original thread. We need to say that there are certain behaviours in some cultures that are not compatible with the ethos of the country you have chosen to settle in. We are a secular country and explain that there are certain religious and cultural beliefs that we acknowledge but we will continue to uphold the law for the majority. Brushing it under the carpet is lighting a fuse.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 38 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:Off topic really but it is being reported that Tommy Robinson has 'begged' the USA to grant him asylum. All sorts of ironies there it seems to me ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 96166.html
I guess he should also ask on behalf of the many journalists who appear to be guilty of the same crime when covering his trial. It is amongst the more stupid prosecutions they could bring really.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 39 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:
erol wrote:Off topic really but it is being reported that Tommy Robinson has 'begged' the USA to grant him asylum. All sorts of ironies there it seems to me ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 96166.html
I guess he should also ask on behalf of the many journalists who appear to be guilty of the same crime when covering his trial. It is amongst the more stupid prosecutions they could bring really.
Do you know of any (let alone many) other 'journalist' that were broadcasting the proceedings outside such a trial where reporting restrictions were in place on an unfiltered and unmoderated medium like facebook that sought to flim and live broadcast the defendants as they entered court and encouraged those viewing to unlawful physical or verbal aggression towards identifiable targets and who were under a suspended sentence for contempt of court having previously been found guilty in a similar case previously ? Yeah what a stupid prosecution. Of course we should let the likes of Tommy Robinson treat the law with contempt because otherwise we just play in to his hands. (that was sarcastic).

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 40 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

kerry 6138 wrote: Strange how the two main keyboard debaters on here hate to watch YouTube videos if it doesn't fit their narrative.
I watch them on occasion but generally avoid the conspiracy videos with dramatic background music and voice overs as they are 100% drivel imo.
Read books outlining both sides of an argument and use a bit of common sense as to what is the most likely scenario works for me.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 41 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:
erol wrote:Off topic really but it is being reported that Tommy Robinson has 'begged' the USA to grant him asylum. All sorts of ironies there it seems to me ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 96166.html
I guess he should also ask on behalf of the many journalists who appear to be guilty of the same crime when covering his trial. It is amongst the more stupid prosecutions they could bring really.
Do you know of any (let alone many) other 'journalist' that were broadcasting the proceedings outside such a trial where reporting restrictions were in place on an unfiltered and unmoderated medium like facebook that sought to flim and live broadcast the defendants as they entered court and encouraged those viewing to unlawful physical or verbal aggression towards identifiable targets and who were under a suspended sentence for contempt of court having previously been found guilty in a similar case previously ? Yeah what a stupid prosecution. Of course we should let the likes of Tommy Robinson treat the law with contempt because otherwise we just play in to his hands. (that was sarcastic).
My understanding is he filmed them after they had been found guilty so how would filming them effect much at all?
Did he encourage unlawful physical or verbal aggression to them? I have seen countless journalists interviewing him on his way in and out of court asking him about the trial which seems sauce for the goose.
Like I say if you want to create a martyr crack on. If you want a number one single get it banned.

User avatar
erol
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue 01 May 2012 7:14 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 42 of 70 in Discussion

Post by erol »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote: My understanding is he filmed them after they had been found guilty so how would filming them effect much at all?
Did he encourage unlawful physical or verbal aggression to them? I have seen countless journalists interviewing him on his way in and out of court asking him about the trial which seems sauce for the goose.
Like I say if you want to create a martyr crack on. If you want a number one single get it banned.
Not according to the judge's in their report who I have to assume are both more knowledgeable than you are as to the details of the case and more impartial too. According to that report he filmed the defendants arriving and it should also be understood that one of the reasons for reporting restrictions being in place was that this trial was one of a series of linked trials that were all still ongoing. It is also the judge's that deemed he "encourage unlawful physical or verbal aggression to them". I do think on the balance of probabilities that if this is what the judge's ruled happened, it is more likely it did happen than the judges are all just lying and saying it happened when it did not for some motive to subvert justice itself. Seeing what you want to see perhaps ?

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 43 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

erol wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote: My understanding is he filmed them after they had been found guilty so how would filming them effect much at all?
Did he encourage unlawful physical or verbal aggression to them? I have seen countless journalists interviewing him on his way in and out of court asking him about the trial which seems sauce for the goose.
Like I say if you want to create a martyr crack on. If you want a number one single get it banned.
Not according to the judge's in their report who I have to assume are both more knowledgeable than you are as to the details of the case and more impartial too. According to that report he filmed the defendants arriving and it should also be understood that one of the reasons for reporting restrictions being in place was that this trial was one of a series of linked trials that were all still ongoing. It is also the judge's that deemed he "encourage unlawful physical or verbal aggression to them". I do think on the balance of probabilities that if this is what the judge's ruled happened, it is more likely it did happen than the judges are all just lying and saying it happened when it did not for some motive to subvert justice itself. Seeing what you want to see perhaps ?
I'm very rusty on the law. What is the offence where you encourage witnesses to keep their mouths shut, for diversity or other reasons or trying to stop the police pursuing a line of enquiry is it perverting the course of justice?

kerry 6138
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon 05 Oct 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 44 of 70 in Discussion

Post by kerry 6138 »

You see evidence in the Jeremy Corbyn article that you linked to , that he earns multi million income in his role as Labour party MP and current leader and see that evidence as comparable to the evidence in the Tommy Robinson link

But I never claimed JC was a multimillionaire only that if you extended the logic that sponsoring / donating to a activist of what ever flavour made them a millionaire then by extension JC must also be one

Corbyn is a member of a number of Parliamentary Trade Union Groups: he is sponsored by several trade unions, including UNISON, Unite and the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers

Corbyn hosted a call-in show on Press TV, an Iranian government television channel, from 2009 to 2012, for which he was paid up to £20,000, according to the register of members' interests at the House of Commons

Robinson has received in excess of £2m in donations and sponsorship, much of it from foreign sources.

In 2017, American billionaire Robert Shillman funded a paid fellowship at the rightwing Canadian website Rebel Media, with Robinson receiving over $6,000 (£5,000) per month.

Erol"_There are those, like me that know this, acknowledge it and do their best to minimise it as much as possible
When someone like Tommy Robinson only ever talks about the first reason


I take it you've not got round to watching the video, you can fast forward to the parts where he talks about the other reasons see message 34


In 2015, which is after such gangs were already exposed
Dont forget to fast forward 16min 2004 leaflet?


then there are those who believe it is something that only other people (and always people they disagree with never those they agree with) do but that they do not. To me as far as I can tell you appear to be in the later category and not the former.

We likely have closer political leanings than you think,but political correctness is one of my weak points sorry.

kerry 6138
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon 05 Oct 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 45 of 70 in Discussion

Post by kerry 6138 »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:
kerry 6138 wrote: Strange how the two main keyboard debaters on here hate to watch YouTube videos if it doesn't fit their narrative.
I watch them on occasion but generally avoid the conspiracy videos with dramatic background music and voice overs as they are 100% drivel imo.
Read books outlining both sides of an argument and use a bit of common sense as to what is the most likely scenario works for me.
Yes I hate it when the Police CCTV operators go overboard with the dramatic music or when they use one of Attenburghs to voice over the evidence footage to enquiries there's just no need.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 46 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

kerry 6138 wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote:
kerry 6138 wrote: Strange how the two main keyboard debaters on here hate to watch YouTube videos if it doesn't fit their narrative.
I watch them on occasion but generally avoid the conspiracy videos with dramatic background music and voice overs as they are 100% drivel imo.
Read books outlining both sides of an argument and use a bit of common sense as to what is the most likely scenario works for me.
Yes I hate it when the Police CCTV operators go overboard with the dramatic music or when they use one of Attenburghs to voice over the evidence footage to enquiries there's just no need.
Are you referring to those climate change films David Attenborough did recently? I mean he is 93 and needs to follow the BBC line so I'll make allowances but, evidence??

kerry 6138
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon 05 Oct 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 47 of 70 in Discussion

Post by kerry 6138 »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:
kerry 6138 wrote:
EnjoyingTheSun wrote: Strange how the two main keyboard debaters on here hate to watch YouTube videos if it doesn't fit their narrative.
Yes I hate it when the Police CCTV operators go overboard with the dramatic music or when they use one of Attenburghs to voice over the evidence footage to enquiries there's just no need.
Are you referring to those climate change films David Attenborough did recently? I mean he is 93 and needs to follow the BBC line so I'll make allowances but, evidence??
No I was referring to the Hillsborough enquiry footage that you didn't want to watch.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 48 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

kerry 6138 wrote:
No I was referring to the Hillsborough enquiry footage that you didn't want to watch.
If you've found a youtube video of Duckfield cackling "and now I've got them" as he throws open the gates then send me the link. If you have more selective video on Liverpool supporters behaving i'll not bother. At no point do I argue that most of the Liverpool supporters behaved that day and most of them had tickets.

kerry 6138
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon 05 Oct 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 49 of 70 in Discussion

Post by kerry 6138 »

EnjoyingTheSun wrote:
kerry 6138 wrote:
No I was referring to the Hillsborough enquiry footage that you didn't want to watch.
If you've found a youtube video of Duckfield cackling "and now I've got them" as he throws open the gates then send me the link. If you have more selective video on Liverpool supporters behaving i'll not bother. At no point do I argue that most of the Liverpool supporters behaved that day and most of them had tickets.
The point I was making was that you and Erol are willing to type thousands of words in defence of your positions but will not watch evidence which maybe contrary

Your picture of Liverpool fans scaling the walls and gates leading to the decision to open the gates is completely at odds with the cctv footage of the gates at the time presented at the enquiry available online

Erols assertion that TR only blames muslims never the authorities and only jumped on the grooming gang bandwagon after it became mainstream is at odds with information available online.

EnjoyingTheSun
Kibkommer
Kibkommer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2018 4:46 pm

Re: Johnson on immigrants - Sauce for the goose ?

  • Quote
  •   Message 50 of 70 in Discussion

Post by EnjoyingTheSun »

kerry 6138 wrote:
Your picture of Liverpool fans scaling the walls and gates leading to the decision to open the gates is completely at odds with the cctv footage of the gates at the time presented at the enquiry available online
Without rehashing the Hillsborough thread, I don't doubt that the majority of fans went to Hillsborough with a ticket and behaved. Especially 100% of those that died. You can post up hours of footage of that.
What I do doubt is that every single Liverpool supporter attempting to get into the ground had a ticket. It would be the first time in history that has happened.

If you was to tell me that yesterday not one person was bitten by a dog, I wouldn't believe you. And I love dogs.
I would probably struggle to refute it with video evidence whereas you would easily be able to find dozens of videos of cute dogs playing nicely. Would that mean that yesterday not one person was bitten by a dog?

Post Reply

Return to “POLITICS - Kibkom North Cyprus Forum”