Britain... Absolutely OUT TO LUNCH... MIND NUMBING Stupidity...

[High_Plains_Drifter]

I read stories like this and it just leaves me sitting in complete disbelief.

I'll tell ya what I see here... I see Britains MUSLIM MAYOR and his supporters/enablers, working to FURTHER eliminate any opposition to the MUSLIM TAKE OVER of Britain.

Britain, the UK, Europe et all, their days as European are numbered. If they don't find their spines soon and stand up to this, Europe WILL be under ISLAMIC CONTROL. Little by little, the muslims are taking over, and the Europeans are ALLOWING it, even HELPING it happen. It's just... hard to believe. Course we're doing the SAME THING right here in America. It's happening here too. Look at the two muslim WITCHES we have in congress.

==============


British Army Says People Who “Describe Themselves as Patriots” Are ‘Extremist Right-Wingers’

Criticizing political correctness also an ‘extremist’ trait.

The British Army has released an information sheet encouraging members of the military to report others as right-wing extremists if they express a myriad of beliefs, including describing themselves as “patriots”.

The sheet is entitled ‘EXTREME RIGHT WING (XRW) INDICATORS & WARNINGS and encourages members of the military to “Look out for individuals who…describe themselves as patriots.”

The notion that describing oneself as a “patriot” equates to right-wing extremism is ludicrous. Being a patriot should be a pre-requisite to join the Army.

Some of the other indications of ‘right-wing extremism’ are equally alarming. They include;


– People who “describe multicultural towns as lost”.
– People who “use the term ‘Islamofascism'”.
– People who refer to political correctness as a “left wing plot”.
– People who are “angry” about the loss of “national identity”.
– People who “make inaccurate generalisations about the left or government”.
– People who refer to those who challenge any of these views as being “indoctrinated”.


This is not the first time the British Army has waded into the political correctness debate with embarrassing results.

Last year, a commercial was released which depicted a Muslim soldier taking off his helmet and praying as colleagues watch nearby.

Colonel Richard Kemp, who led British troops in Afghanistan, said the new campaign showed an Army “being forced down a route of political correctness” and “neglecting the main group of people who are interested in joining”.

More British Muslims have joined ISIS than joined the British Army, so it doesn’t appear to be working.

https://summit.news/2019/05/27/british-army-says-people-who-describe-themselves-as-patriots-are-extremist-right-wingers/

[Drummond]

I read stories like this and it just leaves me sitting in complete disbelief.

I'll tell ya what I see here... I see Britains MUSLIM MAYOR and his supporters/enablers, working to FURTHER eliminate any opposition to the MUSLIM TAKE OVER of Britain.

Britain, the UK, Europe et all, their days as European are numbered. If they don't find their spines soon and stand up to this, Europe WILL be under ISLAMIC CONTROL. Little by little, the muslims are taking over, and the Europeans are ALLOWING it, even HELPING it happen. It's just... hard to believe. Course we're doing the SAME THING right here in America. It's happening here too. Look at the two muslim WITCHES we have in congress.

==============


British Army Says People Who “Describe Themselves as Patriots” Are ‘Extremist Right-Wingers’

Criticizing political correctness also an ‘extremist’ trait.

The British Army has released an information sheet encouraging members of the military to report others as right-wing extremists if they express a myriad of beliefs, including describing themselves as “patriots”.

The sheet is entitled ‘EXTREME RIGHT WING (XRW) INDICATORS & WARNINGS and encourages members of the military to “Look out for individuals who…describe themselves as patriots.”

The notion that describing oneself as a “patriot” equates to right-wing extremism is ludicrous. Being a patriot should be a pre-requisite to join the Army.

Some of the other indications of ‘right-wing extremism’ are equally alarming. They include;


– People who “describe multicultural towns as lost”.
– People who “use the term ‘Islamofascism'”.
– People who refer to political correctness as a “left wing plot”.
– People who are “angry” about the loss of “national identity”.
– People who “make inaccurate generalisations about the left or government”.
– People who refer to those who challenge any of these views as being “indoctrinated”.


This is not the first time the British Army has waded into the political correctness debate with embarrassing results.

Last year, a commercial was released which depicted a Muslim soldier taking off his helmet and praying as colleagues watch nearby.

Colonel Richard Kemp, who led British troops in Afghanistan, said the new campaign showed an Army “being forced down a route of political correctness” and “neglecting the main group of people who are interested in joining”.

More British Muslims have joined ISIS than joined the British Army, so it doesn’t appear to be working.

https://summit.news/2019/05/27/british-army-says-people-who-describe-themselves-as-patriots-are-extremist-right-wingers/

In two words, and as the article mentions:

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.

Dream up a disparaging way of tagging someone, in some way. Make it stick. It becomes 'fashionable', ultimately, 'normal' to tag in the way that's been invented.

Those taking all this on never realise that what they think, what attitudes they hold, is undergoing a process of re-engineering .. and they think their attitudes and beliefs are all their own. Future decisions flow from its effect. Political beliefs, loyalties, ditto.

And the Left wins its battles for hearts and minds ... through stealth, and DICTATING what people must think. People believe they're free-thinkers, when they're not.

'HPD' ... this is only the latest manifestation of a VERY long-running process. I wonder if America has ever properly woken up to the reality I'm describing ? Because THIS IS HOW THE LEFT WORKS.

We've already got to the stage where 'hatespeech' is actionable in law. That can only have come about as a result of consensus concerning what is, or is not, 'right' thinking, and the supposed correctness of governing what is or is not permitted. Such processes are far-advanced over here in the UK and in wider Europe, and this is because the Left KEEPS ON WINNING POWER, and attains respectability in society.

This is how they use the opportunities that social acceptance and power-wielding permits them.

Any Muslim terrorist planting a bomb is automatically an 'extremist'. That's to say, an automatic disconnection in the citizen's mind between the terrorist and mainstream Islam is expected ... so that Islam itself is never 'tainted' by the actions of the terrorist. Anyone daring to recognise any greater truth is 'racist' in so doing.

I don't know what more to say. The UK and Europe will never shake any of this off. How about American society ? Will you fall prey to the same process of social engineering ?

I'm guessing that you will, but I don't know. I'm hoping .. NOT !!

It all comes down to what freedoms the Left will (or do) enjoy in America. Because, I absolutely promise you, that they WILL abuse them.

Do you destroy cancer, or, just let it spread, unchecked ? We see where a lack of restraint upon it leads ....

[High_Plains_Drifter]

In two words, and as the article mentions:

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.

Dream up a disparaging way of tagging someone, in some way. Make it stick. It becomes 'fashionable', ultimately, 'normal' to tag in the way that's been invented.

Those taking all this on never realise that what they think, what attitudes they hold, is undergoing a process of re-engineering .. and they think their attitudes and beliefs are all their own. Future decisions flow from its effect. Political beliefs, loyalties, ditto.

And the Left wins its battles for hearts and minds ... through stealth, and DICTATING what people must think. People believe they're free-thinkers, when they're not.

'HPD' ... this is only the latest manifestation of a VERY long-running process. I wonder if America has ever properly woken up to the reality I'm describing ? Because THIS IS HOW THE LEFT WORKS.

We've already got to the stage where 'hatespeech' is actionable in law. That can only have come about as a result of consensus concerning what is, or is not, 'right' thinking, and the supposed correctness of governing what is or is not permitted. Such processes are far-advanced over here in the UK and in wider Europe, and this is because the Left KEEPS ON WINNING POWER, and attains respectability in society.

This is how they use the opportunities that social acceptance and power-wielding permits them.

Any Muslim terrorist planting a bomb is automatically an 'extremist'. That's to say, an automatic disconnection in the citizen's mind between the terrorist and mainstream Islam is expected ... so that Islam itself is never 'tainted' by the actions of the terrorist. Anyone daring to recognise any greater truth is 'racist' in so doing.

I don't know what more to say. The UK and Europe will never shake any of this off. How about American society ? Will you fall prey to the same process of social engineering ?

I'm guessing that you will, but I don't know. I'm hoping .. NOT !!

It all comes down to what freedoms the Left will (or do) enjoy in America. Because, I absolutely promise you, that they WILL abuse them.

Do you destroy cancer, or, just let it spread, unchecked ? We see where a lack of restraint upon it leads ....
And how the people of Europe can just allow this sort of thing to happen, or the people of America, or the people of any nation...

In Islamised UK town diversity has completely disappeared as almost all inhabitants are Muslim


https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/10/in-islamised-uk-town-diversity-has-completely-disappeared-as-almost-all-inhabitants-are-muslim/#.XO0dsYo5xCo.twitter

... or course when an nation has been disarmed, such as much of Europe, and they make it ILLEGAL to even utter a disparaging word against your nation being INVADED and TAKEN OVER, it makes it almost impossible to effect any sort of change or push back. You're just stuck watching your land, your town, your nation be invaded and taken over by the filthiest cultist trash on the planet, and you can't say or do a damn thing about it, or YOU will be the one DEMONIZED and PUNISHED. It's probably one of the maddening things about the world today, in my opinion.

I hope there's many more like you in Europe, brother Drummond, and someday you all just erupt in protest, and even violent protest, because peaceful protest won't make any difference. Violence, force, killing is the only thing muslims understand. That's why THEY use such tactics. I think the good people of the world, the conservatives, the patriots, the nationalists and even Christians, need to start protesting in numbers and frequency to get the globalists attention, to let them know we're fed up, we've had enough, and not only that, but we want to REVERSE what they've been up to. We want the muslims GONE. Send the filthy sons a bitches BACK to where ever they came from, because they are NOT ASSIMILATING into the nations that they invaded. They are not INTEGRATING and becoming a member of that nation. They are there to TAKE OVER. To make the nation they have invaded into a MUSLIM NATION. They are there to CHANGE THAT NATION. I'm just DUMBFOUNDED that the powers to be, even in the face of OVERWHELMING PROOF that that is EXACTLY what happens EVERYWHERE muslims go, that they just IGNORE it. SOMEONE wants ISLAM to RULE THE WORLD, for SOME reason. George Soros? Who? And for WHAT POSSIBLE reason?

[Drummond]

And how the people of Europe can just allow this sort of thing to happen, or the people of America, or the people of any nation...

In Islamised UK town diversity has completely disappeared as almost all inhabitants are Muslim


https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/10/in-islamised-uk-town-diversity-has-completely-disappeared-as-almost-all-inhabitants-are-muslim/#.XO0dsYo5xCo.twitter

... or course when an nation has been disarmed, such as much of Europe, and they make it ILLEGAL to even utter a disparaging word against your nation being INVADED and TAKEN OVER, it makes it almost impossible to effect any sort of change or push back. You're just stuck watching your land, your town, your nation be invaded and taken over by the filthiest cultist trash on the planet, and you can't say or do a damn thing about it, or YOU will be the one DEMONIZED and PUNISHED. It's probably one of the maddening things about the world today, in my opinion.

I hope there's many more like you in Europe, brother Drummond, and someday you all just erupt in protest, and even violent protest, because peaceful protest won't make any difference. Violence, force, killing is the only thing muslims understand. That's why THEY use such tactics. I think the good people of the world, the conservatives, the patriots, the nationalists and even Christians, need to start protesting in numbers and frequency to get the globalists attention, to let them know we're fed up, we've had enough, and not only that, but we want to REVERSE what they've been up to. We want the muslims GONE. Send the filthy sons a bitches BACK to where ever they came from, because they are NOT ASSIMILATING into the nations that they invaded. They are not INTEGRATING and becoming a member of that nation. They are there to TAKE OVER. To make the nation they have invaded into a MUSLIM NATION. They are there to CHANGE THAT NATION. I'm just DUMBFOUNDED that the powers to be, even in the face of OVERWHELMING PROOF that that is EXACTLY what happens EVERYWHERE muslims go, that they just IGNORE it. SOMEONE wants ISLAM to RULE THE WORLD, for SOME reason. George Soros? Who? And for WHAT POSSIBLE reason?:clap::clap::clap::clap:

Very well said.

The only possible change in direction for the UK and Europe is through out-and-out revolution, I believe. Which I think is unlikely, though maybe not impossible ? Electorally ... we've had a massive electoral upset in recent days, with a new political Party, the Brexit Party, getting a lion's share of all the votes cast in the UK for the European election. Our Conservative Party, the GOVERNING Party, one that's existed for centuries, driven into electoral oblivion by a new Party not yet two MONTHS old !!

I call that revolutionary, proof that there are issues where the British public CAN rebel, make its voice heard.

But issues such as Islam are different. Our socialists have had decades to adjust thinking to their preference. Now - and you make this point yourself - we have hatespeech laws. If I stood on a street corner and uttered anti-Islamic sentiments loudly enough for a Muslim to be offended by them, said Muslim could claim I was 'inciting' anti-Muslim hatred. S/he could also claim I was being racist. And, the police could be called and I could be arrested.

That's just for publicly expressing a view not to a Muslim's liking.

The police can only act if obeying a legal position. One exists in British law.

I don't think Americans grasp how completely pernicious the Left is, and can be. If Americans allow it, what's true for my part of the world, WILL become true for yours ... trust me, they'll find a way !!

Only time will tell as to whether the US will become as 'terraformed' in its thinking as we are.

By the way ... just seen ....

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/conservative-party-islamophobia-must-be-investigated-by-equality-watchdog-britains-largest-muslim-group-demands/ar-AAC1V9F?li=BBoPRmx&ocid=mailsignout


Britain’s largest Muslim organisation has called for a formal investigation into Islamophobia in the Conservative Party.

The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) sent more than 20 pages of evidence to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, in the wake of the government’s refusal to adopt a proposed definition on Islamophobia.

Its complaint accused the Tories of “ignoring” calls for an independent inquiry on anti-Muslim hatred and failing to take action against Islamophobes in its ranks.

Boris Johnson, who could be the next prime minister, and MPs including Bob Blackman, Zac Goldsmith, Michael Fabricant, Andrew Rosindell and Philip Hollobone were named in the dossier.

Harun Rashid Khan, secretary general of the MCB, said: “The concerns of Muslims at large about Islamophobia within the Conservative Party have fallen on deaf ears.

[Noir]

Electorally ... we've had a massive electoral upset in recent days, with a new political Party, the Brexit Party, getting a lion's share of all the votes cast in the UK for the European election. Our Conservative Party, the GOVERNING Party, one that's existed for centuries, driven into electoral oblivion by a new Party not yet two MONTHS old !!

Kinda - The Brexit party is really the Farage party, just as UKIP were, if anything I think their result was a fair but worse than it could of been - building on brexit, an awful Labour Party, an awful Conservative party, no challengable policies, no historical baggage etc, for them to only walk away with around 31% of the popular vote was a surprise to me.

Also surprising was the remarkably low turnout which shows just how many people don’t care at all.

[Drummond]

Kinda - The Brexit party is really the Farage party, just as UKIP were, if anything I think their result was a fair but worse than it could of been - building on brexit, an awful Labour Party, an awful Conservative party, no challengable policies, no historical baggage etc, for them to only walk away with around 31% of the popular vote was a surprise to me.

Also surprising was the remarkably low turnout which shows just how many people don’t care at all.

Oh, I see. So, there's no bigger issue, or cause, to fight for .. than just supporting that charismatic individual called Nigel Farage ?? Nigel Farage had no other reason in mind to create the Brexit Party, than to issue a 'worship me' challenge to the electorate ?

Yes. I'm sure you DO want to disparage the pro-Brexit success as much as possible.

Labour is awful (they always were, though it'd 'help' if their message was coherent) ! The Conservative Party is only 'awful' because Mrs May was so weak and spineless when she needed to be the exact opposite, with all that that's caused. And don't minimise the extent of the Brexit Party's success (though you really need to, eh !).

Noir, your 'don't care' jibe comes close to being disingenuous. You and I very well know how dispirited the British people are. It isn't that they 'don't care' .. many just see British politics, these days, as something out of tune with them, with MP's doing what THEY want, not what the British public voted for, back in 2016. They're disenchanted with politics. Not because they don't care, but because they've become jaded and, as they see it, 'disenfranchised'.

Anyway, at a time in the future when Brexit is no longer a major issue, we'll have other concerns we can actually look towards, minus diversion; such as, is Britain for THE BRITISH, or must our Muslim contingent eat away still further at our very freedoms and identity ??

.. Or, perhaps it's 'racist' to feel that we even have a RIGHT to our national identity ???

Do tell.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

:clap::clap::clap::clap:

Very well said.

The only possible change in direction for the UK and Europe is through out-and-out revolution, I believe. Which I think is unlikely, though maybe not impossible ? Electorally ... we've had a massive electoral upset in recent days, with a new political Party, the Brexit Party, getting a lion's share of all the votes cast in the UK for the European election. Our Conservative Party, the GOVERNING Party, one that's existed for centuries, driven into electoral oblivion by a new Party not yet two MONTHS old !!

I call that revolutionary, proof that there are issues where the British public CAN rebel, make its voice heard.

But issues such as Islam are different. Our socialists have had decades to adjust thinking to their preference. Now - and you make this point yourself - we have hatespeech laws. If I stood on a street corner and uttered anti-Islamic sentiments loudly enough for a Muslim to be offended by them, said Muslim could claim I was 'inciting' anti-Muslim hatred. S/he could also claim I was being racist. And, the police could be called and I could be arrested.

That's just for publicly expressing a view not to a Muslim's liking.

The police can only act if obeying a legal position. One exists in British law.

I don't think Americans grasp how completely pernicious the Left is, and can be. If Americans allow it, what's true for my part of the world, WILL become true for yours ... trust me, they'll find a way !!

Only time will tell as to whether the US will become as 'terraformed' in its thinking as we are.

By the way ... just seen ....

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/conservative-party-islamophobia-must-be-investigated-by-equality-watchdog-britains-largest-muslim-group-demands/ar-AAC1V9F?li=BBoPRmx&ocid=mailsignout
Sometimes a simple meme speaks a thousand words... the disjointed thought pattern and hypocrisy of those protecting islam is mind boggling...

https://i.ibb.co/9W3TGGQ/muslim-bitch.jpg

[Drummond]

Sometimes a simply meme speaks a thousand words... the disjointed thought pattern and hypocrisy of those protecting islam is mind boggling...

https://i.ibb.co/9W3TGGQ/muslim-bitch.jpg

Actually, it's all remarkably simple. Socialists have done what they'll always do ... that is, remain loyal to their twisted worldview.

To them, it's a unshakeable imperative that Islamists MUST receive respect and all the deference they could ever want. When dogmatism rules you, you're blind to anything that may ever intrude upon it. And if you're as arrogant about it as Socialists are, then making everybody see things in exactly the same way is an equally unshakeable imperative.

Muslims could nuke London tomorrow, declaring their love and loyalty for Islam and their paedophile Prophet Mohammed in the process ... and STILL, our Labour Party would insist that mainsteam Islam had nothing to do with it. No matter what death and destruction is meted out, still, those responsible would be 'fringe extremists'.

Society could literally be destroyed, and our Socialists would demand that nobody recognise what the true source of it was.

[Noir]

Oh, I see. So, there's no bigger issue, or cause, to fight for .. than just supporting that charismatic individual called Nigel Farage ?? Nigel Farage had no other reason in mind to create the Brexit Party, than to issue a 'worship me' challenge to the electorate ?

What are the relevant differentiators between the Brexit party and UKIP?


Yes. I'm sure you DO want to disparage the pro-Brexit success as much as possible.

Did you not think the brexit party was going to do better?


Noir, your 'don't care' jibe comes close to being disingenuous. You and I very well know how dispirited the British people are. It isn't that they 'don't care' .. many just see British politics, these days, as something out of tune with them, with MP's doing what THEY want, not what the British public voted for, back in 2016. They're disenchanted with politics. Not because they don't care, but because they've become jaded and, as they see it, 'disenfranchised'.

Do you think these ‘disenfranchised’ people who chose not to vote are primarily Brexiters or Remainers?

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Actually, it's all remarkably simple. Socialists have done what they'll always do ... that is, remain loyal to their twisted worldview.

To them, it's a unshakeable imperative that Islamists MUST receive respect and all the deference they could ever want. When dogmatism rules you, you're blind to anything that may ever intrude upon it. And if you're as arrogant about it as Socialists are, then making everybody see things in exactly the same way is an equally unshakeable imperative.

Muslims could nuke London tomorrow, declaring their love and loyalty for Islam and their paedophile Prophet Mohammed in the process ... and STILL, our Labour Party would insist that mainsteam Islam had nothing to do with it. No matter what death and destruction is meted out, still, those responsible would be 'fringe extremists'.

Society could literally be destroyed, and our Socialists would demand that nobody recognise what the true source of it was.
SPOT ON, brother Drummond... it's insanity.

It's no different than if someone broke into your house, killed one of your family, and then law enforcement telling you that you're WRONG if that upsets you, that you have NO RIGHT to respond to the killer in any demeaning fashion, or YOU will be arrested, NOT THE KILLER, because YOU are the HATER, the RACIST. (When did islam become a RACE? I missed when that happened.)

It's beyond comprehension.

I think the world needs another world war. The world needs a reset, or the world isn't going to be a world that anyone wants to live in other than fascist dictators and muslims. How humans can become such disjointed thinkers is beyond my comprehension.

[Drummond]

What are the relevant differentiators between the Brexit party and UKIP?



Did you not think the brexit party was going to do better?



Do you think these ‘disenfranchised’ people who chose not to vote are primarily Brexiters or Remainers?

I note that, now as previously, you're completely ignoring the 'Islam' issue that's been discussed. Is this because you feel that political correctness demands your silence on the issue ?

Anyway: as for Brexit Party v UKIP ... again, I'm sure you know the answer as well as I do.

Mr Farage distanced himself from UKIP ... partly because, wrongly, he thought its work had been completed, by the time the 2016 Referendum was done 'n' dusted ... and partly because he didn't like what had started happening within UKIP. He took a particular dislike to one of his successors, who, he felt, was diverging from a fully reputable viewpoint.

Now, of course, we know that the Brexit promise has been fudged, maybe sidelined altogether, with Parliament defining for itself what should or should not be the proper progress, or even direction, Brexit takes. So, Mr Farage has acted, and achieved a stunning political success against all those responsible for progressively betraying the Referendum imperative.

I had no thoughts as to how well the Brexit Party should do, other than to do so well that their message, the dissatisfaction represented by it, receive its proper airing. This has been achieved, with all major Parties doing worse than they have.

I think that the disenfranchised people choosing not to vote must obviously be pro-Brexit. After all, having the Brexit process delayed or fudged serves the 'Remain' agenda, as after all, we still remain within the EU after the original deadline to leave !!!

I'm also sure that pro-Brexiters will be disgusted by the extent that the very meaning of 'leave' has been redefined to suit politicians' personal agendas. Nobody voted for 'a deal', much less for its existence to be an absolute imperative. We wanted to leave, and political machinations have contrived to stall that goal.

YES ... it would've been 'nice' for the EU to provide us with favourable terms of departure, but .. they've absolutely refused to. The 'dodgy deal' they've come up with is one they absolutely insist we accept, even though we obviously won't ... and they refuse to bend on that.

So, we've been shabbily treated. This is extremely unlikely to change. So the one course of action left is to walk, minus a deal.

I believe that Mrs May's successor should go to the EU and demand something a lot better from them. Any prevarication, any measure of refusal ... and we leave in October minus a deal. No 'ifs, buts or maybes' ... we just walk.

And I think that the Brexit Party's success symbolises exactly that position, and the general public's insisted-upon wish in that regard.

[Drummond]

SPOT ON, brother Drummond... it's insanity.

It's no different than if someone broke into your house, killed one of your family, and then law enforcement telling you that you're WRONG if that upsets you, that you have NO RIGHT to respond to the killer in any demeaning fashion, or YOU will be arrested, NOT THE KILLER, because YOU are the HATER, the RACIST. (When did islam become a RACE? I missed when that happened.)

It's beyond comprehension.

I think the world needs another world war. The world needs a reset, or the world isn't going to be a world that anyone wants to live in other than fascist dictators and muslims. How humans can become such disjointed thinkers is beyond my comprehension.

I totally identify with how you feel about all this .. and as for your example about law enforcement's approach to a murderous intruder ... well, we do in fact have strict rules about how far a householder may go to defend life and property !! We're constrained to show nothing more than the necessary force to restrain the intruder.

There's an old example I can provide of a farmer who went to a supposed 'extreme' in defending his property. No family members were killed ... it actually didn't get that bad (!!) ... but, still, the defender of his property fared worse, in the eyes of the law, than did the surviving intruder. [Here, you see, using a firearm to defend your home is a big 'no-no' ...]

I've posted this before ... check this link out ....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1604238.stm

As to another world war, here we disagree. I can't conceive of a world war that didn't make the extinction of the human race highly likely. Not to be wished for, I suggest !

[High_Plains_Drifter]

As to another world war, here we disagree. I can't conceive of a world war that didn't make the extinction of the human race highly likely. Not to be wished for, I suggest !
I'm simply out of ideas as to how to rectify the present situation WITHOUT violence. Voting seems to be irrelevant, as are peaceful protests. Our "leaders," ... ahem... if you want to refer to them as such, appear to simply IGNORE the voters, to a large extent. They lie to get into office, then forget everything they said on the campaign trail, and/or misplace their SPINE. Although we are witnessing a different phenomenon here in America recently. The leftists here are laying bare their anti American agenda for the world to see. They seem to be in competition to see who can be the most RADICAL. Apparently that's what they believe their voting base wants, and it very well may be. We have a plethora of anti American trash here, and they're all coming straight out of the American educational system with their anti American indoctrination fresh in their skulls.

[Elessar]

SPOT ON, brother Drummond... it's insanity.

It's no different than if someone broke into your house, killed one of your family, and then law enforcement telling you that you're WRONG if that upsets you, that you have NO RIGHT to respond to the killer in any demeaning fashion, or YOU will be arrested, NOT THE KILLER, because YOU are the HATER, the RACIST. (When did islam become a RACE? I missed when that happened.)

It's beyond comprehension.

I think the world needs another world war. The world needs a reset, or the world isn't going to be a world that anyone wants to live in other than fascist dictators and muslims. How humans can become such disjointed thinkers is beyond my comprehension.

Spot On! I have been saying the same damn thing for years now, which includes Hispanics.

[Drummond]

I'm simply out of ideas as to how to rectify the present situation WITHOUT violence. Voting seems to be irrelevant, as are peaceful protests. Our "leaders," ... ahem... if you want to refer to them as such, appear to simply IGNORE the voters, to a large extent. They lie to get into office, then forget everything they said on the campaign trail, and/or misplace their SPINE. Although we are witnessing a different phenomenon here in America recently. The leftists here are laying bare their anti American agenda for the world to see. They seem to be in competition to see who can be the most RADICAL. Apparently that's what they believe their voting base wants, and it very well may be. We have a plethora of anti American trash here, and they're all coming straight out of the American educational system with their anti American indoctrination fresh in their skulls.

It depends on the society you're talking about when considering how to best tackle that society's problems.

Discrediting / defeating any and all Socialist political outfits is a 'must', of course. They're a cancer needing their demise as one. Without that vital step taken, they'd always be present, always trying to subvert and terraform opinion. That's something that'd have to be stopped.

That dealt with (to whatever extent possible) .. I think that a solution to the Islamic issue requires something perhaps a little indirect, or gradual; a 'phased' approach, perhaps. If an approach is adopted that's too direct, too draconian, this invites the media and all Islamic-sympathetic forces to mobilise sentiment to fight it. The greater the influence of political correctness, the more likely that some measure of demonisation against anti-Islamic efforts could be successfully contrived.

For my own society ... an electoral win for our Brexit Party, where they actually take up the reins of Government, could turn out to be a pivotal step. It's at least possible !! A part of the Brexit Party's appeal is that it's a Party where our own territory, our own rights at self-Government, are considered core values to be protected. Take that a step forward ... to a conscious fight for our own identity ... and forces that'd fight this would have to be in the firing line for action to be taken against them. I believe Muslim demands for continued deference would incur increasing resistance.

With all this going on, opinions would be increasingly polarised. A 'sense of national self' and 'national pride' would emerge, to the point where Islam would cease to be seen as something to be included within our identity (!!). This would form the basis for a real fightback.

Now ... exactly what America has which could be any equivalent ... I don't know. I'd need advice on that.

[Noir]

I note that, now as previously, you're completely ignoring the 'Islam' issue that's been discussed. Is this because you feel that political correctness demands your silence on the issue ?

There is already plenty to discuss without also having a discussion on tribalism.


Anyway: as for Brexit Party v UKIP ... again, I'm sure you know the answer as well as I do.

Mr Farage distanced himself from UKIP ... partly because, wrongly, he thought its work had been completed, by the time the 2016 Referendum was done 'n' dusted ... and partly because he didn't like what had started happening within UKIP. He took a particular dislike to one of his successors, who, he felt, was diverging from a fully reputable viewpoint.

Now, of course, we know that the Brexit promise has been fudged, maybe sidelined altogether, with Parliament defining for itself what should or should not be the proper progress, or even direction, Brexit takes. So, Mr Farage has acted, and achieved a stunning political success against all those responsible for progressively betraying the Referendum imperative.

I had no thoughts as to how well the Brexit Party should do, other than to do so well that their message, the dissatisfaction represented by it, receive its proper airing. This has been achieved, with all major Parties doing worse than they have.

None of the above specifies a difference between the Brexit party and UKIP.


I think that the disenfranchised people choosing not to vote must obviously be pro-Brexit. After all, having the Brexit process delayed or fudged serves the 'Remain' agenda, as after all, we still remain within the EU after the original deadline to leave !!!

Maybe that’s what you expected, but it’s not what I expected, people who voted brexit 2 years ago not voting in EU elections (where UKIP has done historically well), against a weak government who is not doing what they want, and with the option of voting for a 1 policy party lead by a vocal, well represent and established leader...then why would they ever expect to be enfranchised.


And I think that the Brexit Party's success symbolises exactly that position, and the general public's insisted-upon wish in that regard.

I think their should be caution is framing this as “the general public’s insisted-upon wish” the Brexit party won 32% of the vote on a 37% turnout, so we know that for around 14% of the voting population Brexit was the only issue they cared about, extrapolating from that what the ‘general public’s wish’ is quite a leap.

[Drummond]

There is already plenty to discuss without also having a discussion on tribalism.

TRIBALISM ?

Is that all you think is involved ?

Islam adds up to a belief system (perhaps a brand of especially murderous cult). That's more than tribalism. Islam exists to dominate. All other religions and beliefs not its own, it stands in total opposition to, the objective being to wipe out all alternatives to it.

Central to any society embracing Islam is the implementation of Sharia Law. I promise you, the stamping on freedoms, the savage potential of full-blown Sharia Law, is decidedly more than just 'tribalism'.


None of the above specifies a difference between the Brexit party and UKIP.

Does it not ? Didn't I say ... 'He took a particular dislike to one of his successors, who, he felt, was diverging from a fully reputable viewpoint'.

Given the correctness of that view, and most of us would agree it WAS correct ... there's your difference. Farage conducts himself reputably. He has views of such clear reputability that, provably, they earn very widespread acceptance and support !!

UKIP's electoral failures in recent times indicate the opposite.


Maybe that’s what you expected, but it’s not what I expected, people who voted brexit 2 years ago not voting in EU elections (where UKIP has done historically well), against a weak government who is not doing what they want, and with the option of voting for a 1 policy party lead by a vocal, well represent and established leader...then why would they ever expect to be enfranchised.

Amazing.

What does our Parliament exist for ? Why do we elect MP's to sit in the Commons ? Is it to represent The People ? Or to REFUSE TO ?

When the Conservatives put the Bill before Parliament, for us to conduct our Referendum, and when the Commons voted it through, they effectively pledged to show that Referendum their support. Otherwise ... what was the point ?? Since its result, the direction of Parliament has been to increasingly defy the outcome of it ... frustrating its implementation, politicising and redefining the decision taken to such a degree that the excuses to NOT implement it have become ever-more dominant.

This is why so many people now feel disenfranchised, Noir ... because elected MP's are doing 'their own thing', and NOT their JOBS.


I think their should be caution is framing this as “the general public’s insisted-upon wish” the Brexit party won 32% of the vote on a 37% turnout, so we know that for around 14% of the voting population Brexit was the only issue they cared about, extrapolating from that what the ‘general public’s wish’ is quite a leap.

All we CAN know is what those who do vote, tell us. All else is pure guesswork. Collect all the people together in your neighbourhood who didn't vote, then YOU tell THEM why they opted out of voting. See how accurate you are in determining for each of them, why that was, and try 'enjoying' their reaction against your sheer arrogance in making the attempt !! After all, you'd completely lack feedback from them as to why they didn't take the trip to their polling station. What would give you the right to come to any viewpoint on that matter ??

The only feedback available would be the feedback shown in votes cast !!

And it's all you have to guide you. More importantly, it's all society itself has to guide it.

If you vote, you have your voice. If not, there is no voice, no statement of intention taken in any one direction. Try running a so-called 'democratic country' from someone's IMAGINED perception of what people MIGHT HAVE wanted to govern them.

One other point: how many General Elections have been won from a basis of what you'd consider to be a minority vote ? How many Governments have been formed from just such a minority ? Would you say that all of them should've been declared null and void, as being 'illegitimate' seizures of power ??

List for me the number of times our society has seen all of that happen. Indeed ... how many Socialist Governments have been formed on the basis of such 'minorities', Noir ?

Come on, Noir. List for me all the Labour Governments which, from an application of YOUR criteria, had NO RIGHT TO GOVERN US !!!

[Noir]

Does it not ? Didn't I say ... 'He took a particular dislike to one of his successors, who, he felt, was diverging from a fully reputable viewpoint'.

Given the correctness of that view, and most of us would agree it WAS correct ... there's your difference. Farage conducts himself reputably. He has views of such clear reputability that, provably, they earn very widespread acceptance and support !!

UKIP's electoral failures in recent times indicate the opposite.

So far the only differentiate you have posted between UKIP and the Brexit party is Nigel Farage, which was my point from the start, which I thought you disagreed with?


What does our Parliament exist for ? Why do we elect MP's to sit in the Commons ? Is it to represent The People ? Or to REFUSE TO ?

This is a school level politics question and it has no definitive answer, because it is individual to the MP.


This is why so many people now feel disenfranchised, Noir ... because elected MP's are doing 'their own thing', and NOT their JOBS.

and they chose to express this disenfranchisement by refusing to vote for the Brexit party?


All we CAN know is what those who do vote, tell us. All else is pure guesswork. Collect all the people together in your neighbourhood who didn't vote, then YOU tell THEM why they opted out of voting. See how accurate you are in determining for each of them, why that was, and try 'enjoying' their reaction against your sheer arrogance in making the attempt !! After all, you'd completely lack feedback from them as to why they didn't take the trip to their polling station. What would give you the right to come to any viewpoint on that matter ??

The only feedback available would be the feedback shown in votes cast !!

Exactly.


One other point: how many General Elections have been won from a basis of what you'd consider to be a minority vote ? How many Governments have been formed from just such a minority ? Would you say that all of them should've been declared null and void, as being 'illegitimate' seizures of power ??

List for me the number of times our society has seen all of that happen. Indeed ... how many Socialist Governments have been formed on the basis of such 'minorities', Noir ?

Come on, Noir. List for me all the Labour Governments which, from an application of YOUR criteria, had NO RIGHT TO GOVERN US !!!

Totally agree.
This is a systemic problem caused by our lack of representation of votes cast, and has resulted in unrepresentative governments (and parliaments) for generations.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

The mass BRAIN WASHING of Germany, Europe, en mass...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=365&v=kYmTFL9nbRQ

[Drummond]

So far the only differentiate you have posted between UKIP and the Brexit party is Nigel Farage, which was my point from the start, which I thought you disagreed with?

But, why ? What are you talking about ?


This is a school level politics question and it has no definitive answer, because it is individual to the MP.

If I understand you correctly (sometimes you're very hard to understand !) ... you're suggesting that the degree an MP feels it justified to defy the Peoples' Will is a matter specific to a particular MP ? Meaning what, that some or all have the RIGHT to go their own way, and say 'to hell with what anybody else wants'.. ?

It's that unaccountably maverick spirit which has done so much to cause the dysfunctionality in the House of Commons, of late ... and it's why people feel disenfranchised. Why ? Because, they ARE.


... and they chose to express this disenfranchisement by refusing to vote for the Brexit party?

Very funny.

You're blind to what happened, just days ago ?? The Brexit Party WAS voted for, far more comprehensively so than for the major Parties, combined !! With an electorate fully in touch with mainstream politics, and the mainstream Parties fully in touch with and receptive to voters' wishes, they should be commanding all the support that mainstream Parties usually do !! [What else made them mainstream, after all ??]

Instead ... those mainstream Parties abandoned their duty to the general public, and instead, their constituent MP's just 'did their own thing'. So, it's been up to the voting Public to remind them of just where their TRUE duty lies ... to work to ACHIEVE BREXIT, as the voters instructed, back in June 2016 ... not to radically redefine it, or delay or frustrate it, as has been happening.


Exactly.

Yes.

Point made.


Totally agree.

This is a systemic problem caused by our lack of representation of votes cast, and has resulted in unrepresentative governments (and parliaments) for generations.

Generations, eh ?

You're saying that lack of voter representation has been true 'for generations' .. ? But, only NOW, has everybody woken up to it ? Why wait GENERATIONS, before giving the main Parties a kicking ??

You're talking rubbish.

No. It's only been an acute problem in recent months. Consequently, NOW, a lesson has been taught.

It remains to be seen whether the main Parties are just too arrogant and power-mad to listen.

The noises coming out of the Labour Party suggest that the Brexit Party's victory is something they're just too arrogant to learn from.

[Noir]

But, why ? What are you talking about ?

My initial statement was that the Brexit party are really just the Farage party, as UKIP we’re, you disagreed with the that so I ask you to define some differences, so far the only thing you’ve mentioned is Farage...


If I understand you correctly (sometimes you're very hard to understand !) ... you're suggesting that the degree an MP feels it justified to defy the Peoples' Will is a matter specific to a particular MP ? Meaning what, that some or all have the RIGHT to go their own way, and say 'to hell with what anybody else wants'.. ?

It's that unaccountably maverick spirit which has done so much to cause the dysfunctionality in the House of Commons, of late ... and it's why people feel disenfranchised. Why ? Because, they ARE.

It depends on the philosophy of the position the MP believes their office holds. Are they in office to represent their party, represent their constituency (within that are they only representing people who voted for them or everyone), represent the country (again split between U.K. and home nations), support their party, Act as a power check to the executive, and what point do they express their own moral judgement etc.

Each of these forms of representation can be reasonably argued for, and how an MP chooses to be representative is an individual choice.


You're blind to what happened, just days ago ?? The Brexit Party WAS voted for, far more comprehensively so than for the major Parties, combined !!

True, though it also did get less than 2 minor party’s combined. They were also the only 2 party’s who have a clear Remain stance on Brexit. How does that factor


Generations, eh ?

You're saying that lack of voter representation has been true 'for generations' .. ? But, only NOW, has everybody woken up to it ? Why wait GENERATIONS, before giving the main Parties a kicking ??

You're talking rubbish.

No. It's only been an acute problem in recent months. Consequently, NOW, a lesson has been taught.

It remains to be seen whether the main Parties are just too arrogant and power-mad to listen.

The noises coming out of the Labour Party suggest that the Brexit Party's victory is something they're just too arrogant to learn from.

If you think our parliamentary elections have been representative in our lifetimes then you are provably wrong.

[Drummond]

My initial statement was that the Brexit party are really just the Farage party, as UKIP weÂ’re, you disagreed with the that so I ask you to define some differences, so far the only thing youÂ’ve mentioned is Farage...

Farage was UKIP's leader ... which means, obviously, that he led them ! What else would you expect him to do ?

Now, he leads the Brexit Party, instead. This, too, means what it says.

UKIP has undergone changes in its character, the likes of which Farage disapproves of. Given UKIP's dismal performance a week ago, I can only think that the general public agrees with him.

Being from the same part of the world that I am, you surely know all this ?

Farage has his own claim to political correctness (which many people have been convinced to 'buy into', as this link illustrates):

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6460153/Nigel-Farage-QUITS-Ukip-protest-Tommy-Robinson.html


Nigel Farage has quit Ukip after 25 years in protest over new leader Gerard Batten's 'obsession with Muslims' and his appointment of Tommy Robinson as an adviser on 'Muslim rape gangs'.

'And so, with a heavy heart, and after all my years of devotion to the party, I am leaving Ukip today,' he wrote in The Telegraph. 'There is a huge space for a Brexit party in British politics, but it won't be filled by Ukip.'


Speaking later on LBC, Mr Farage accused Mr Batten of 'turning a blind eye to extremism' and attempting to turn the party from an 'electoral' force into a 'party of street activism'.


It depends on the philosophy of the position the MP believes their office holds. Are they in office to represent their party, represent their constituency (within that are they only representing people who voted for them or everyone), represent the country (again split between U.K. and home nations), support their party, Act as a power check to the executive, and what point do they express their own moral judgement etc.

Each of these forms of representation can be reasonably argued for, and how an MP chooses to be representative is an individual choice.

Your last point is technically correct .. IF .. MP's are given a free vote. More often than not, that's not true, and they're commanded to vote as their Party instructs.

But here's the point. Do political Parties exist to follow the Will of the People, or, are they there to defy it ?? Parliament voted to sanction the 2016 Referendum, voted to accept its result, voted also to invoke Article 50.

Since then, there's been jockeying to redefine Brexit, and even to frustrate its implementation entirely. In other words, the Referendum result has incurred increasing efforts to see it opposed.

So tell me. Do Parties exist for the people they say they represent, or, are they just there because they want to wield power THEIR way, and their voters are nothing more to them than enablers ?


True, though it also did get less than 2 minor partyÂ’s combined. They were also the only 2 partyÂ’s who have a clear Remain stance on Brexit. How does that factor

The two Parties supposedly taking a 'pro-Remain' position were not, neither of them, just representing one policy direction. There's no way I'm aware of that'd determine how many of their voters sided with either of those Parties purely on the grounds of the Brexit situation.

Remember. 'Change UK', the polar opposite of the Brexit Party and entirely geared towards one anti-Brexit position, got few votes for itself, and performed dismally.


If you think our parliamentary elections have been representative in our lifetimes then you are provably wrong.

You're an anarchist, then ? Or, someone having contempt for democratic process ?

So tell me. How many LABOUR victories do you think were illegitimate ? Give us as much detail on that as you'd like .....

[Noir]

Farage was UKIP's leader ... which means, obviously, that he led them ! What else would you expect him to do ?

Now, he leads the Brexit Party, instead. This, too, means what it says.

UKIP has undergone changes in its character, the likes of which Farage disapproves of. Given UKIP's dismal performance a week ago, I can only think that the general public agrees with him.

Being from the same part of the world that I am, you surely know all this ?

Farage has his own claim to political correctness (which many people have been convinced to 'buy into', as this link illustrates):

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6460153/Nigel-Farage-QUITS-Ukip-protest-Tommy-Robinson.html

POLICY
State a POLICY in which UKIP and the Brexit party differ.
That’s POLICY, nothing to do with Farage, POLICY.
I don’t think I can be any more clear about what I am asking for.


Your last point is technically correct

Its exactly correct.


.. IF .. MP's are given a free vote. More often than not, that's not true, and they're commanded to vote as their Party instructs.

Following the party whip is a form of representation I mentioned in my post.


But here's the point. Do political Parties exist to follow the Will of the People, or, are they there to defy it ?? Parliament voted to sanction the 2016 Referendum, voted to accept its result, voted also to invoke Article 50.

Reread my post again, the MPs that make up a political party each have their own discretion to represent in the manor which they believe to be their duty


The two Parties supposedly taking a 'pro-Remain' position were not, neither of them, just representing one policy direction. There's no way I'm aware of that'd determine how many of their voters sided with either of those Parties purely on the grounds of the Brexit situation.

On the ground of common sense how many people do you think at the elections are pro-Brexit and voted for the Green Party?


You're an anarchist, then ? Or, someone having contempt for democratic process ?

I am not an anarchist.


So tell me. How many LABOUR victories do you think were illegitimate ? Give us as much detail on that as you'd like .....

As a factor by which they were proportionally representative of the total electorate - all of them.

[Drummond]

POLICY
State a POLICY in which UKIP and the Brexit party differ.
That’s POLICY, nothing to do with Farage, POLICY.
I don’t think I can be any more clear about what I am asking for.

So tell me, Noir ... what policy declaration has the VERY newly-formed Brexit Party issued ? Beyond, that is, fighting to get Brexit done 'n' dusted ?

UKIP's been around for years, and has issued a manifesto. The Brexit Party, hasn't ! This is partly because they haven't exactly had much time to come up with one (!), and also because Farage made the very fair point that manifestos tend not to be kept to ... and after all, have either of the major Parties remained dedicated to THEIRS ?

Farage has traded on peoples' distrust of the direction UKIP has taken, I think, under its current leadership. However ... people know Farage, and - evidently - trust him.

Sadly for people such as yourself, this is a rather hard thing to overcome. People have learned not to trust the direction the other Parties SAY they're taking (to the extent that Labour is even coherent about theirs !). They have zero reason to think that of Farage.


Following the party whip is a form of representation I mentioned in my post.

It can be, but frequently, isn't.

Who do the whips follow, if not the Party leadership diktat at the time ? And how consistently do Party leaders loyally represent what the electorate expect of them ?


Reread my post again, the MPs that make up a political party each have their own discretion to represent in the manor which they believe to be their duty

[typo: wrong choice of spelling: try 'MANNER']

Noir, it's become apparent that THEY think this. Mrs May, for example, claimed time and again to be loyal to what the 'electorate wanted' of her, and her Party. So why is it, then, that her Premiership is esentially over, and her Party has had one massive kicking at the ballot box ?

Perceiving the freedom of 'discretion' to represent according to THEIR interpretation, and doing WHAT THE PUBLIC REALLY WANTS, are clearly two different things. The electorate has been clear. They want actual representation, not any MP to subvert it towards a different direction.

If what you say is true, though, what you're really saying is that the general public has no right to such a thing !!


On the ground of common sense how many people do you think at the elections are pro-Brexit and voted for the Green Party?

Ho ho.

Your idea of common sense probably differs a lot from mine. Subjectivity isn't helpful.

The point is that, even if I gave you an answer, I'd have no way of backing it up, any more than you could counter it with figures to back your disagreement.

The ultimate point is that NOBODY REALLY KNOWS. It could be 5 percent who voted Green. It could be 40 percent, or more. I can conceive of voters who'd vote Green purely and simply because they think Green issues supersede all others !!


I am not an anarchist.

Excellent !

I look forward to your support of Conservative values in forthcoming posts !!


As a factor by which they were proportionally representative of the total electorate - all of them.

Very good.

Would you claim the same for Conservative victories ?

If YES ... you may want to revisit your claim not to be an anarchist. Unless you just hate democracy ?

Or -- do you prefer a form of democracy where Parliament forever returns indecisive results ? Could THAT be it ?

If YES to that final conclusion ... see above. It'd be more evidence of your preference for anarchy. Obviously.