Election Year or Fear!

[ramAnag]

and so the close knit karass closes down still further! What I believe are facts, what you believe are rhetoric. We are a;; entitled to opinion and views but please dont be so condescending as to believe that you know all the facts and others just know BS. That degree of narrow mindedness will bite you in the arse one day, if it hasnt already

There is no ‘close knit karass’, GP, not on here anyway and it’s not ‘narrow minded’ to challenge your statement.
Just think about it. Q. Was it true to suggest that the only flags that can be flown with impunity these days are the Rainbow and Palestinian ones? A. No, it really wasn’t, as Saturday certainly proved and as any Premiership football crowd will also do. That’s not my opinion it’s verifiable fact. I really don’t want to fall out over it, and I won’t. Neither do I (ever) think I know all the facts, but in this instance you were just agitating and your claim is false.

[ramAnag]

...which is fine, but when (14/9) I fact checked and offered independant correction of what I believe was an innocently posted falsehood from MA, you were right across it, pushing back with 'MA may or not be correct...I don't know either (and neither) do you'. Yes I did, based on then-current (and still current) knowledge. That's you in denial (I can't think of a better word) about a thoroughly fact-checked (using independant sources), politely put and referenced correction, my assumption I'm afraid being because the original fitted your 'leaning'. Note that MA appeared to take it in good part. You appear to react the same with most facts and anecdotes that don't support your view.

Not sure how I can say the above 'nicely' but I hope its fairly polite

As regards MA’s alleged falsehood I’m not sure the truth is out yet, AF and I have no ‘leaning’ as you put it.
I’d never heard of Charlie Kirk before his death and I now doubt we’d have agreed on much, but I don’t agree with murdering people one disagrees with either.

My point was that you very quickly put MA down in an over critical way. He took it well, that’s to his credit and entirely up to him.

My other point, which you’ve steered well clear of, was - and no one needs AI to check it - that your criticism of my attitude to the forum was completely wrong and factually incorrect. Debate has no value if it’s based on falsehood and I think it’s part of our current malaise that the facts, as I’ve just suggested to GP, are no longer always respected as they need to be.

[Geoff Parkstone]

There is no ‘close knit karass’, GP, not on here anyway and it’s not ‘narrow minded’ to challenge your statement.
Just think about it. Q. Was it true to suggest that the only flags that can be flown with impunity these days are the Rainbow and Palestinian ones? A. No, it really wasn’t, as Saturday certainly proved and as any Premiership football crowd will also do. That’s not my opinion it’s verifiable fact. I really don’t want to fall out over it, and I won’t. Neither do I (ever) think I know all the facts, but in this instance you were just agitating and your claim is false.

my observation related to your (somewhat sycophantic) post 4178 as captioned by the "reply to with quote" feature, rather than any issue with a flag. I find it always helps to read a comment in context. Perhaps English is not taught that way any longer?

[Geoff Parkstone]

[QUOTE=ramAnag;40751610]As regards MA?s alleged falsehood I?m not sure the truth is out yet, AF and I have no ?leaning? as you put it.
I?d never heard of Charlie Kirk before his death and I now doubt we?d have agreed on much, but I don?t agree with murdering people one disagrees with either.

My point was that you very quickly put MA down in an over critical way. He took it well, that?s to his credit and entirely up to him.

My other point, which you?ve steered well clear of, was - and no one needs AI to check it - that your criticism of my attitude to the forum was completely wrong and factually incorrect. Debate has no value if it?s based on falsehood and I think it?s part of our current malaise that the facts, as I?ve just suggested to GP, are no longer always respected as they need to be.[/QUOTE]


I agree with the highlighted comment, its just that its blatantly obvious that you swallow up all and any "facts" as godpel when they agree with your own narrative and instantly pooh-pooh any "facts" that dont support your own belief. In that sense you dont need to see "facts" as youve already made up your mind well in advance of them.

Im sure I am guilty of this to some degree, as are we all but in your case it absolutely clouds any judgement and frustrates others to a point of madness. Now this may be a deliberate ploy, who knows - but your narrow mindedness makes it hard to take anything you say seriously. Its hugely counter productive. You've been indoctrinated to such an extent that you make the "accursed right wing press" look reasonable in comparison.

[SithHappens]

Have you found my post on Kirk's statements Sith? if not I can repost, though to be honest you can find him saying those things online given AF's concern over the context. Just google Charlie Kirk videos.

I've not really looked to be honest. I think I know I'll find a lot I disagree with strongly.

[ramAnag]

[QUOTE=Geoff Parkstone;40751616]

As regards MA?s alleged falsehood I?m not sure the truth is out yet, AF and I have no ?leaning? as you put it.
I?d never heard of Charlie Kirk before his death and I now doubt we?d have agreed on much, but I don?t agree with murdering people one disagrees with either.

My point was that you very quickly put MA down in an over critical way. He took it well, that?s to his credit and entirely up to him.

My other point, which you?ve steered well clear of, was - and no one needs AI to check it - that your criticism of my attitude to the forum was completely wrong and factually incorrect. Debate has no value if it?s based on falsehood and I think it?s part of our current malaise that the facts, as I?ve just suggested to GP, are no longer always respected as they need to be.[/QUOTE]


I agree with the highlighted comment, its just that its blatantly obvious that you swallow up all and any "facts" as godpel when they agree with your own narrative and instantly pooh-pooh any "facts" that dont support your own belief. In that sense you dont need to see "facts" as youve already made up your mind well in advance of them.

Im sure I am guilty of this to some degree, as are we all but in your case it absolutely clouds any judgement and frustrates others to a point of madness. Now this may be a deliberate ploy, who knows - but your narrow mindedness makes it hard to take anything you say seriously. Its hugely counter productive. You've been indoctrinated to such an extent that you make the "accursed right wing press" look reasonable in comparison.

They’re not sycophantic at all. Just a bit like the old ‘like’ button and me being appreciative of the objectivity.

We all agree and disagree at times. I agreed with Swale and Sith this morning and you’ve taken the hump. Your problem not mine.

I’m not disagreeing with your opinion either. You didn’t offer an opinion. You stated that only the Rainbow and Palestinian flags were acceptable now. That isn’t an opinion, it’s just, quite simply, an untrue and provocative statement.

[Geoff Parkstone]

"I?m not disagreeing with your opinion either. You didn?t offer an opinion. You stated that only the Rainbow and Palestinian flags were acceptable now. That isn?t an opinion, it?s just, quite simply, an untrue and provocative statement."

How many times do I need to say that my reaction to your "I heart Swale" posts was not to your comment about flags. That was a light hearted throw away line in half jest and not one to be taken seriously. Your response was not akin to the olf "like" button - if it were Id not have an issue. It was expresssed in such a way as to insult anyone who had a contrary opinion. Or should I say that is how it cam e accross - offensive, inaccurate and unnecessary. By all means agree with the opinions Swal and Sith expressed, but please dont have the bare faced gall to call those opinions that you like FACT and dismiss thtose you dislike as rhetoric ie FICTION. You may think something to be true but that doesnt make it so - I might think you are a dentist, but that doesnt make you one.

My point is a wider one concerning your assessment of "facts". It would seem that the only observations that you regard as fact (ie incontrovertible / true) are ones which echo and support your own preset views. On this basis if you decided in your head that 2+2=5 (a not unrealistic possibility) then no amount of mathematical proof would convince you otherwise and you would denounce conventional arithmetic suggesting the answer to be 4 as right wing rhetoric!

[MadAmster]

So, for those of us living elsewhere, is it really only Rainbow and Palestinian flags that are permitted in the UK? From Roger Ramjet's posts I get that impression.

[SithHappens]

Of course not

[ramAnag]

Thank you, Sith and MA.

GP. I’m sorry if you took offence. My intention this morning was to be appreciative of Sith, and more particularly, Swale’s posts because, imo, they were reasoned and objective. Untypically so, of late, on here. I did not set out to ‘insult’ you.

My other point is that here, as elsewhere, exaggeration and fabrication have no part to play in honest debate. You made out that we have reached a stage where only the two flags you mentioned are now acceptable in this country. That isn’t true and it’s the type of exaggerated untruth that fuels resentment amongst the less discerning in this country.

Likewise, Andy claiming that I moan about the forum more than everyone else put together is incorrect. As I’ve pointed out, I’ve made just 17/154 comments on the subject - not all of them critical - making it another exaggeration designed to discredit, along with his claims about Swale and I being blinkered, narrow minded bullies etc.

It is my opinion that politicians are generally amongst the most dishonest of individuals and that over the last decade or so those, particularly, but not exclusively, like Farage, Trump, Johnson, Truss, Hancock etc have profited from making dishonest and exaggerated claims. It is something, imo, we can do without on here and that’s where I hope to leave it.

[Geoff Parkstone]

An interesting selection of (lets say) disingenuous politicians to be kind. Curious that the lying warmonger is omitted from the list and I might add Abbot - although thats probably more stupidity than dishonesty - but I wouldnt argue the merits of those you did name. Some may invoke the Nuremburg defence but Im not buying that.

Having been away for some weeks I cant comment on who complains the most about the site mechanics, I suspect we all do, but I have noted that you seem to blame Andy for it / not fixing it whereas most others simply report its problems. Yes he is the "face of the franchise" by virtue of his role but it appears from his responses that (assuming he is to be believed) he is fighting something of a kafkaesque wall of silence and is powerless as the rest of us cockroaches to find answers.

I think we have to face facts that its dying both structurally and membership wise and adapt to life without it. I have to say the past few weeks away have been cathartic and I didnt really miss the "debate" although the football content may have helped during the bleak start to the season. The break has made me realise that the views in here are so deeply entranched that debate isnt really more than a waste of breath. People come to state their view rather than with open minds to consider possibilities and I have singled you out as prime example - although Swale is not for turning either, he does sometimes conced points. Sorry if this might have upset you but its only rhetoric

[ramAnag]

An interesting selection of (lets say) disingenuous politicians to be kind. Curious that the lying warmonger is omitted from the list and I might add Abbot - although thats probably more stupidity than dishonesty - but I wouldnt argue the merits of those you did name. Some may invoke the Nuremburg defence but Im not buying that.

Having been away for some weeks I cant comment on who complains the most about the site mechanics, I suspect we all do, but I have noted that you seem to blame Andy for it / not fixing it whereas most others simply report its problems. Yes he is the "face of the franchise" by virtue of his role but it appears from his responses that (assuming he is to be believed) he is fighting something of a kafkaesque wall of silence and is powerless as the rest of us cockroaches to find answers.

I think we have to face facts that its dying both structurally and membership wise and adapt to life without it. I have to say the past few weeks away have been cathartic and I didnt really miss the "debate" although the football content may have helped during the bleak start to the season. The break has made me realise that the views in here are so deeply entranched that debate isnt really more than a waste of breath. People come to state their view rather than with open minds to consider possibilities and I have singled you out as prime example - although Swale is not for turning either, he does sometimes conced points. Sorry if this might have upset you but its only rhetoric

I think by referring to the ‘last decade or so’ Blair was disqualified.

We’ve done the Andy being to blame thing in your absence. He isn’t, but the state of the forum is, imo, a reason for its slow demise. People haven’t got the time to keep reposting/correcting etc.

I’m not sure views are as ‘entrenched’ as you and AF make out. You might seek to mischievously adopt the personna of a bigoted old right wing curmudgeon, but I suspect you’d have felt just about as uncomfortable at the Robinson/Musk rally last weekend as me.

The rhetoric comment wasn’t even aimed at you - don’t flatter yourself. It was aimed at those in the media who damn everything that Starmer does/says seemingly without thought and just for the sake of it.

[Geoff Parkstone]

"but I suspect you?d have felt just about as uncomfortable at the Robinson/Musk rally last weekend as me."

Christ, your the last person I'd have expected to go. Hope you weren't amongst the dozen or so who were arrested.

As it happens I'm having some work done in/on house at the moment and two of the guys on the job went to the march. Very interesting to hear their experience and then compare it to the media reports. Indications from this source siggest that the whole thing was reported by left wing radical press. Just saying: it's all perception not black and white.

[Andy_Faber]

"but I suspect you?d have felt just about as uncomfortable at the Robinson/Musk rally last weekend as me."

Christ, your the last person I'd have expected to go. Hope you weren't amongst the dozen or so who were arrested.

As it happens I'm having some work done in/on house at the moment and two of the guys on the job went to the march. Very interesting to hear their experience and then compare it to the media reports. Indications from this source siggest that the whole thing was reported by left wing radical press. Just saying: it's all perception not black and white.

Agreeing with GP, massively misreported, I only know folk who went through Facebook but they had a peaceful time, there are yobbos to the fore at any rally, I could offer vids of a number of ‘riots’ at pro Palestine rallies but if y’all were interested in seeing both sides of a story you’d have already sought them out

[ramAnag]

"but I suspect you?d have felt just about as uncomfortable at the Robinson/Musk rally last weekend as me."

Christ, your the last person I'd have expected to go. Hope you weren't amongst the dozen or so who were arrested.

As it happens I'm having some work done in/on house at the moment and two of the guys on the job went to the march. Very interesting to hear their experience and then compare it to the media reports. Indications from this source siggest that the whole thing was reported by left wing radical press. Just saying: it's all perception not black and white.

Lol. Wasn’t even in the country, your honour. Bad choice of words.

I just meant, despite the persona you often adopt on here, I’m not sure you’re a natural fit where the likes of Robinson or Musk are concerned. Hope not anyway.