OT. Schools...normality and Coronavirus.

[swaledale]

Sorry, I'm with Tricky. I don't need the youtube links or plucked Swaley facts, I have my own eyes and ears and trust them better to form an opinion than anything else. The BBC (and most others, but seeing as we all have a legal obligation to fund the Beeb, I've the right to feel aggreived with their behaviour) do not report with impartiality, they push their agenda's and coerce viewers direction of opinion, whether through careful coperate direction, or by allowing individual reporters to run away with their political leanings.

Yup personal prejudice doesn't affect your views whatsoever of course! The fact you don't agree with the way the world is going is more a sad reflection on your inability to understand society's development.

Also fact check is an impartial review of the output of the BBC, but I guess your one of those who thinks if the facts don't suit my views then I don't believe them!

It wasn't plucked facts it was the reality of who is in charge at the BBC, do you know that it has never had a Labour or left leaning Chairman? If you swallow the *******s pumped out by right wing groups who don't like scrutiny of their actions then thats rather telling!

[AdiSalisbury]

Yup personal prejudice doesn't affect your views whatsoever of course! The fact you don't agree with the way the world is going is more a sad reflection on your inability to understand society's development.

Also fact check is an impartial review of the output of the BBC, but I guess your one of those who thinks if the facts don't suit my views then I don't believe them!

It wasn't plucked facts it was the reality of who is in charge at the BBC, do you know that it has never had a Labour or left leaning Chairman? If you swallow the *******s pumped out by right wing groups who don't like scrutiny of their actions then thats rather telling!

Nope, because I agree that Laura K's made up reporting on Corbyn was wrong. I don't care which way they go, they're not impartial. And I don't care what the right wing groups say, I'm talking about the BBC, and what I personally observe. You used to be able to avoid crap reporting by not reading tabloid papers, but now it's mainstream news. Sad, and a reverse of the supossed enlightened generation.

[Trickytreesreds]

But your merely displaying your extreme prejudice here, as in fact most of your posts do, and lets face it you have been shown to be somewhat cavalier with the facts and indeed the source of your views!

You happen to be at odds with the way society is developing, I get it that for a dinosaur and bigot like yourself this is uncomfortable and against your views, but unfortunately for you, times change, attitudes change and whilst there may indeed be a large number of the population who to some extent share these views, this is the reality and either accept that or as i suspect will be the case grumble and moan down the pub and the internet until you shuffle off your mortal coil.

My extreme predjudice for screaming about the lack of impartiality? Classic.

You Sir epitomise todays left /Liberal stance on cancel culture.
If you don't like what we say/want, we are going to do our best to remove you/your opinion and impose our "new" censorship on society.
JK Rowling is a classic. Absolute nobodies have tried to get publishers etc to not work with her, for her views.
Not that she's poor enough to care anyway. But how the hell is any publisher going to cast away a writer who makes them millions, for some political despot with a WOKE/BLM/Multi genda opinion that doesn't like her?

Free speech is fine in the left/Liberals eyes, as long as it conforms to their ideals. If it doesn't, you're a Nazi !!!!! (OR BIGOT, AS YOU LIKE TO THROW AROUND)

[Geoff Parkstone]

Fair point Swale, society is definitely evolving in directions that not everyone likes - and indeed arguably always has as the next generation(s) steer the ship in a different direction from their predecessors. Some agree with that new direction, such as rA, who I imagine has always wanted to see such a societal change. Some disagree, such as TTR who prefers the status quo to remain unchanged. There are maybe some out there that want to see regression. But enough of the Amish.

This is what makes the Brexit decision such a surprise. The younger generation, largely responsible for steering the ship now (I don't mean the under 20's by this, but the younger working generation) are better educated than their forefathers and more aware of wider issues in society: yet seemingly those of the older generation swung the vote which will create issues not so much now but in 15 years perhaps when there is an overwhelming desire to rejoin!!

IMO the problem is that such directional changes tend to overcompensate and so instead of gentle evolution we see bigger swings one way and back again to regain a coherent and consensus way forward. Is it ever thus.- - but that process in itself creates negative responses.

Everyone at their core, for example, would agree with the central (non political) aims of BLM. However there is a wide divergence of opinion as to how to address the issue, from the radical to the gentle to the "let sleeping dogs lie". The radical aspects will always then create a negative backlash which we are seeing something of right now.

[AdiSalisbury]

"let sleeping dogs lie".

Topical.

[ramAnag]

Fair point Swale, society is definitely evolving in directions that not everyone likes - and indeed arguably always has as the next generation(s) steer the ship in a different direction from their predecessors. Some agree with that new direction, such as rA, who I imagine has always wanted to see such a societal change. Some disagree, such as TTR who prefers the status quo to remain unchanged. There are maybe some out there that want to see regression. But enough of the Amish.

This is what makes the Brexit decision such a surprise. The younger generation, largely responsible for steering the ship now (I don't mean the under 20's by this, but the younger working generation) are better educated than their forefathers and more aware of wider issues in society: yet seemingly those of the older generation swung the vote which will create issues not so much now but in 15 years perhaps when there is an overwhelming desire to rejoin!!

IMO the problem is that such directional changes tend to overcompensate and so instead of gentle evolution we see bigger swings one way and back again to regain a coherent and consensus way forward. Is it ever thus.- - but that process in itself creates negative responses.

Everyone at their core, for example, would agree with the central (non political) aims of BLM. However there is a wide divergence of opinion as to how to address the issue, from the radical to the gentle to the "let sleeping dogs lie". The radical aspects will always then create a negative backlash which we are seeing something of right now.

Geoff Parkstone...this site’s biggest enigma since Chris Martin! Yesterday’s Mr. Nasty becomes today’s Mr. Reasonable. For what it’s worth I much prefer today’s version.

You’re right, I do want to see ‘societal change’ but not of the huge ‘raving lefty’ nature than your yesterday’s incarnation and TTR repeatedly and incorrectly suggest.

I just want to see a fairer society...not ‘giveaway’ fair but just a recognition that the absurd gap between rich and poor is unjustifiable, immoral and ultimately destructive.
I don’t believe in people getting something for nothing but I do firmly believe that - Worldwide not just in the UK - there needs to be a move towards a more caring and egalitarian philosophy and a World that is governed by competent, caring politicians rather than dishonest, often corrupt and incompetent ones.

More Jesus Christ - without the organised religion bit - than Karl Marx. ‘Do as you would be done by’ is the closest I have to any mantra.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Geoff Parkstone...this site’s biggest enigma since Chris Martin! Yesterday’s Mr. Nasty becomes today’s Mr. Reasonable. For what it’s worth I much prefer today’s version.

Kill the poor

[Andy_Faber]

Everyone at their core, for example, would agree with the central (non political) aims of BLM

Don’t bet on it Geoff. My daughter is, amongst many things I don’t understand, an internet ‘influencer’ with more followers than any Forest attendance I can think of. And has a black boyfriend, lovely fellah. Over the weekend of the statue toppling she challenged those followers to support her support for blm or stop following her. She lost 15% of her followers in 24 hours. Add into that mix that only around 50% of her followers are white, so on that sample 30% of young white females are anti-blm. It’s a simmering pot out there, i hope someone doesn’t turn the heat up.

[Andy_Faber]

Kill the poor

I think that’s a Motörhead ‘song‘

[Geoff Parkstone]

You'd be wrong

in my context its a Dead Kennedy song

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgpa7wEAz7I