How come there isn't a thread for this ?

Is it because they've revealed their true colours, excuse the deliberate pun.

Folk were warned re their true intentions, but as always called racist by the naive.

Just now, Escobarp said:

Has anyone in public office made such statements? 
 

yiu will never stop folk saying stupid things that’s social media innit. But she’s dangerous very dangerous 

Nope, I'd hope not.

Aye it's very irresponsible.

12 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

How stupid is this woman. And surely she needs to be censored as shit like this is dangerous. 
 

 

She can’t wear matching shoes so this doesn’t surprise me

Since all the reports so far point to it being a gang related shooting, that is a shameful comment from Abbott.......but sadly not surprising from that cunt.

7 minutes ago, bolton va va said:

Since all the reports so far point to it being a gang related shooting, that is a shameful comment from Abbott.......but sadly not surprising from that cunt.

25 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

How stupid is this woman. And surely she needs to be censored as shit like this is dangerous. 
 

 

All true.

But I defend her right to say it. 

Free speech is always the important thing. Or to put it another way how would we ever know how cretinous she is if she was censored? I'm sure she's a censorious cancel-culture merchant herself - but the vast majority have better standards. Let her speak. Let her wilt in the fierce heat of debate.

27 minutes ago, paulhanley said:

All true.

But I defend her right to say it. 

Free speech is always the important thing. Or to put it another way how would we ever know how cretinous she is if she was censored? I'm sure she's a censorious cancel-culture merchant herself - but the vast majority have better standards. Let her speak. Let her wilt in the fierce heat of debate.

I would much rather anyone in public office did not have the continued ability to incite trouble with shitty outbursts such as this Paul. It’s helping nobody. 

Your chance to say what you think about sports stars involving themselves in social and political matters, including BLM, kneeling down, etc.

oops, forgot the link!

Edited May 24, 20215 yr by MickyD
Forgot link

2 hours ago, Escobarp said:

I would much rather anyone in public office did not have the continued ability to incite trouble with shitty outbursts such as this Paul. It’s helping nobody. 

I know. But I can't come on here and criticise the woke folk for their self-righteous censoriousness and then advocate Diane Abbot being gagged. She's crackers - but the only way you ever know a nutter is a nutter is when they open their gob.

3 hours ago, wanderer1984 said:

No doubt another protest is on it's way.

I'm surprised Diane Abacus hasn't found a way to blame whitey for this yet

10 minutes ago, DavidLeesMullet said:

I'm surprised Diane Abacus hasn't found a way to blame whitey for this yet

I read the tweet and reckon it was aimed that way.

 

Bbc were reporting it happened at a house party and suspect a rival gang. Doesn't state if she was a member of a gang but tbh 27 year olds should have grown out of that. 

Just now, only1swanny said:

I read the tweet and reckon it was aimed that way.

 

Bbc were reporting it happened at a house party and suspect a rival gang. Doesn't state if she was a member of a gang but tbh 27 year olds should have grown out of that. 

Never understand this kind of gang mentality.

Had a problem with a gang on my street but it usually just ended up in a stone fight, or if I could find one of them on their own I'd belt them one.

18 hours ago, DavidLeesMullet said:

The longest journey starts with a single step El Numbnutsio

You really are the king of cutting insults 😂

1 hour ago, paulhanley said:

I know. But I can't come on here and criticise the woke folk for their self-righteous censoriousness and then advocate Diane Abbot being gagged. She's crackers - but the only way you ever know a nutter is a nutter is when they open their gob.

Whose censoring you Paul?

10 minutes ago, DavidLeesMullet said:

Never understand this kind of gang mentality.

Had a problem with a gang on my street but it usually just ended up in a stone fight, or if I could find one of them on their own I'd belt them one.

😁 if it was a party on Rye Lane I don't think it was the Bash Street Kids.

Aye jumped the gun a bit has Diane.

That's a very generous of you Mick.

Without any evidence whatsoever she has issued a tweet that attempts to stir up racial tensions. It is clear what she is inferring. 

3 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

😁 if it was a party on Rye Lane I don't think it was the Bash Street Kids.

Actually, that's a bit unfair, it's all hipster bars like John the Unicorn and Bao restaurants there now, plus Peckham Levels - watched a few England matches there. Go there with the kids a lot to the pictures, never felt unsafe, but then I'm not going to house parties in the small hours anymore. Round the back in Bellenden Rd its really posh, all delis and public schools into Dulwich.

6 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

Whose censoring you Paul?

Nobody on here. This is a forum. We debate.

I am talking in a general sense about wokery and its no platforming tendencies and attempts to de-legitimise and marginalise different points of view by immediately branding them racist/sexist/transphobic etc. We've discussed this before . You know ... the tactic that's now been rumbled as part of the ever increasing challenge to the worst excesses of liberal groupthink. Brexiteers are't thicko racists any more - they are red wall voters. This is 2021, not 2016. 

Come on you know this deep in your Guardian reading heart. You lost the electoral wars. The democracy-denying went down like a lead balloon with the electorate. Now you're losing the culture wars too. Tide is unstoppable my friend. Not looking great is it.

 

Just now, paulhanley said:

Nobody on here. This is a forum. We debate.

I am talking in a general sense about wokery and its no platforming tendencies and attempts to de-legitimise and marginalise different points of view by immediately branding them racist/sexist/transphobic etc. We've discussed this before . You know ... the tactic that's now been rumbled as part of the ever increasing challenge to the worst excesses of liberal groupthink. Brexiteers are't thicko racists any more - they are red wall voters. This is 2021, not 2016. 

Come on you know this deep in your Guardian reading heart. You lost the electoral wars. The democracy-denying went down like a lead balloon with the electorate. Now you're losing the culture wars too. Tide is unstoppable my friend. Not looking great is it.

 

But who is censoring you, Paul?

1 minute ago, Not in Crawley said:

But who is censoring you, Paul?

I'll give you a second chance (below). Nobody is censoring me on here. It's a true pleasure to debate with you. I think you talk a load of shit, but I defend your right to say it.

Nobody on here. This is a forum. We debate.

I am talking in a general sense about wokery and its no platforming tendencies and attempts to de-legitimise and marginalise different points of view by immediately branding them racist/sexist/transphobic etc. We've discussed this before 

 

4 minutes ago, paulhanley said:

Nobody on here. This is a forum. We debate.

I am talking in a general sense about wokery and its no platforming tendencies and attempts to de-legitimise and marginalise different points of view by immediately branding them racist/sexist/transphobic etc. We've discussed this before . You know ... the tactic that's now been rumbled as part of the ever increasing challenge to the worst excesses of liberal groupthink. Brexiteers are't thicko racists any more - they are red wall voters. This is 2021, not 2016. 

Come on you know this deep in your Guardian reading heart. You lost the electoral wars. The democracy-denying went down like a lead balloon with the electorate. Now you're losing the culture wars too. Tide is unstoppable my friend. Not looking great is it.

 

Great post Paul. Bravo 👏🏻 

38 minutes ago, DavidLeesMullet said:

Never understand this kind of gang mentality.

Had a problem with a gang on my street but it usually just ended up in a stone fight, or if I could find one of them on their own I'd belt them one.

I don't think it's the same sort of gangs

3 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

I don't think it's the same sort of gangs

I think he went toe to toe with the Famous Five. 

10 minutes ago, paulhanley said:

I'll give you a second chance (below). Nobody is censoring me on here. It's a true pleasure to debate with you. I think you talk a load of shit, but I defend your right to say it.

Nobody on here. This is a forum. We debate.

I am talking in a general sense about wokery and its no platforming tendencies and attempts to de-legitimise and marginalise different points of view by immediately branding them racist/sexist/transphobic etc. We've discussed this before 

 

I wasn't asking on here, Paul. Who is censoring you?

So far, since I've asked this we've had something about changing the name of an ice cream, eating raw liver in peace and this sort of Woke illuminate you reference.

So, just out of interest who is censoring you? What can't you not say or do that you'd like to, and who is stopping you? Surely if you care that much about this topic as you clearly do, you'd be able to answer these straightforward questions?

As I say, I'm just interested, I'm not trying to have a start an argument with you.

37 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

But who is censoring you, Paul?

I don't think anybody is censoring anybody in the literal sense of the word (not me anyway).

But there are certain topics, opinions and ideas that I hold (or would at least like to explore) but am unable to for fear of my career. 

I think that's probably what he's alluding to?

2 minutes ago, kent_white said:

I don't think anybody is censoring anybody in the literal sense of the word (not me anyway).

But there are certain topics, opinions and ideas that I hold (or would at least like to explore) but am unable to for fear of my career. 

I think that's probably what he's alluding to?

in a nutshell

14 minutes ago, kent_white said:

I don't think anybody is censoring anybody in the literal sense of the word (not me anyway).

But there are certain topics, opinions and ideas that I hold (or would at least like to explore) but am unable to for fear of my career. 

I think that's probably what he's alluding to?

To be fair pal, you shouldn't be able to watch porn whilst brewing up for the nurses 😀