OT - Manchester again.

[swaledale]

So the police and the home secretary have asked that the pro Palestine Action protests in London tomorrow be psotponed for a week to ensure the event can be properly policed and as an act of respect for the victims in Manchester. This would appear to have been rejected and the protests go ahead at time of writing. Quite extraordinarily callous.

It would be a huge shame if a car were to drive into the protestors who may be without a full police escort due to higher prioritiesthat they need to resource but, as they say, you cant fix stupid.

Six months ago I was on balance pro palestine. The continued protests here caused me to develop Palestine fatigue and feel more in the "I dont give a ****, they deserve each other" camp. After yesterday (although Ive yet to see any evidence that this attack was directly linked) my feeling is more akin to ban all protests as inflammatory, anti semitic and encouraging attacka such as we have seen. Pull the flags down as they symbolise hatred. yesterday has lost Palestine an ally - OK its just me but there surely must be many more individuals who are now heartily sick of the whole protest movement here which (if it is linked) have resulted in the mindless death of 3 british citizens - yes I include the assailant in that number as I'm assuming he has been radicalised along the way..

Rather simplistic in my view. Individuals have and will continue for whatever reason, bizarre thoughts they have in their head carry out random acts of violence. Whether it be the guy who killed Kirk, the young (white) man in Plymouth who shot his mother or yesterdays tragic killings.

Its a stretch to attribute such acts to protests and a stretch to describe all protests as inflammatory or indeed as radicalising. Whereas the link to politicians of all political persuasion and their words and actions is much more clear cut. As indeed is the role of social media, with extreme philosophies and incitement to violence as a way of resolving matters having been proven to radicalise people into extreme acts of violence.

So your heartily sick of protests, a democratic way of showing dissent with what's happening with a government or governments? Yet so many of your hard won freedoms and rights wouldn't have been achieved without them!

Or are you heartily sick of being reminded that governments including ours have stood by whilst a nation state, formed from people who were subject to ethnic cleansing and unspeakable horrors in the last war are now effectively committing genocide on largely innocent civilians, including women and children?

I don't disagree that it would be courtesy and common sense to have postponed the prop Palestinian march but why the decision of the organisers of that march, should mean Palestine has lost an ally is frankly strange thinking.

It is the case that one can condemn and disavow the perpetrator of the killings yesterday or indeed anyone who encourages, facilitates and commits such atrocities and at the same time recognise that what Israel is doing in Gaza, with a death toll of 60,000+ is unacceptable and against International law.

It is also the case that the actions of Israeli government and Trump in ignoring International law with their actions in Doha and against a supposed Venezuelan drug boat together with Uk politicians like Farage who urge ignoring human rights laws, will encourage other states and indeed individuals to act in a similar way, leading to a complete breakdown of international rules based behaviour, which has largely stopped significant conflicts.

[swaledale]

I'd question the phrase, Starmer and his government are thoroughly disliked, it might be true amongst the people you mix with and indeed social media might give that impression, such is the nature of the algorithms that push such material to the fore.

That narrative is certainly being pushed by the right wing and supposedly not so right wing mainstream media, with relatively few organisations giving a measured critique of Starmer and his government, but then that's the nature of news today.

But even on the basis of the fatuous opinion polls constantly published, over 30% still support Labour and given that most governments get in with under 40% of voters supporting them, that's far from a thoroughly disliked government.

But I guess if your blinkered, then such nuances as facts and reality are ignored in favour of what FB tells you?

[swaledale]

Which is all well and good, not exactly how I see it but you’d expect that and I can see the point you and Rog are now making.

On the other hand that isn’t what my original reply was referencing…i.e. no sooner had the incident been reported than GP had jumped on the anti-Starmer bandwagon claiming that anyone suggesting any possible anti-Palestinian line could expect to be ‘banged up’ by Starmer’s thought police.

That was nonsense. As you say it is an ‘overseas event’ which Starmer has no control over. The man has a Jewish wife FGS. What happens in Israel/Gaza he is not responsible for. The actions of one man, or perhaps a group of four people, in Manchester yesterday he has little control over other than, perhaps, to try and ensure that the security services were well equipped enough to act as competently as they seemingly did.

P.S. I don’t ‘reject religion’. Just wish they’d all stop fighting about it. I respect religion and its allegorical power. I also believe in each to their own and think it’s a pity those more committed to individual religions don’t appear to feel the same.

I do think in these cases Palestine and indeed with Trump's fundamentalists, religion is used as a cover. What is actually happening here is political ideology, dressed up as religious differences and often shamefully used by politicians and indeed some religious leaders to further that ideology. Removing religion from the equation, would not alter the fact that the human race likes power and especially power over other humans, whether that be by book, bullet or the ballot box.

[ramAnag]

I won?t speak for GP but that kind of response is a reflection IMO of some of the dafter/more sinister (depending on your pov) activities of HM Constabulary lately (and I don?t mean Lucy Collins) which has started to look suspiciously like 1984 come to life. Any association with Starmer is, IMO again, a reflection of the fact that he?s /his govt is thoroughly disliked (whatever the reason, 22 mill black hole, 14 years of incompetence blah blah). I go back to the point though that in UK, which is most people?s focus, we don?t see many Jewish acts of terror

Clarification re religion understood, but with respect to your opinion, using a heavy metal analogy, you are up in row Z seated not down in the mosh pit and it?s a whole different story down there

I imagine you’re talking of Lucy Connolly (not Collins) and we’ve been down this road before. It’s my opinion that someone who actively encourages what she did deserves what she got. Nothing remotely like ‘1984’.

Are you suggesting that her behaviour and what she advocated/incited was acceptable? Are you suggesting there was no ‘black hole’ inherited by Labour last year or that, following the banking crisis there wasn’t 14 years of Government incompetence? Five PM’s in that period might suggest otherwise.

If you are we disagree, but I’m really not sure of your point and I’m sorry but I don’t really understand your Row Z/mosh pit analogy regarding religion either.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Re Lucy C, to make it easier, I don't defend her inflammatory rantings but I feel the punishment was not altogether proportionate. However that's past history now, so really no point debating her.

But how is her case any different to, say, radical Imams calling for followers to rise up and slay the infidel? I'm sure in the fullness of time Jihad al Shami will be shown to have been radicalised by one or more individuals and causes. What will happen to his mentors who could arguably be said to have successfully achieved what the likes of Lucy C failed to do. Those that influenced Jihad to act how he did are equally culpable for yesterday's actual murders - but will they face the weight of the law? We will see but I'm not putting money on it.

Jihad was just a pawn in a sinister game played by people far higher up the food chain - not excusing his actions but suggesting there are bigger wider issue in play here that will likely be placed under the carpet.

And so the process will continue and these attacks will not be isolated. Those who instigate them will remain in the shadows while the footsoldiers are sacrificed. There's always another volunteer to be persuaded and (based on performances so far) those "teachers" (no disrespect rA) will remain outside prosecution/deportation/whatever as a disruptive scar on our society, hell bent on ensuring that a harmonious diverse society will never happen. Muslim Farages if you will.

Yet Lucy C served her time, achieved nothing and noone will remember her name by this time next year (Andy's forgotten it already!).

The law punishes the stupid failures, they are easy targets, yet the real villains of this piece go undetected or unchallenged.

Hate to use the expression 2 tier justice (that epithet isn't Starmer's alone) it's more of a global challenge.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Swale "So your heartily sick of protests, a democratic way of showing dissent with what's happening with a government or governments? Yet so many of your hard won freedoms and rights wouldn't have been achieved without them!"

Indeed they were hard won - by my and your ancestors, peer groups etc. But they were hard won by british people for the benefit of the British citizens. Not by a bunch of wokes loonies and fringe minorities not interested in their own country but protesting in favour of one group of terrorists against in effect another group. Whatever the outcome it wont effect me so yes, Im sick of those particular protests as in no way can I relate to them any longer. My sympathy evaporated the minute "the cause" started killing british citizens in britain to demonstrate I know not what.

Mostly the protestors seem to be just a bunch of people with minimnal skin in the game and still less to do with their lives joining in on the bandwagon that makes themselves feel relevant. As has often been noted the LGBT community would be wiped out if it were to establish itself in an islamist state. Just a bunch of happy clappers.

there you go, I realise Ive used the expression british far too many times for your comfort, but simply this. When those people bring their war to these shores, and none of them come with clean hands, they can just **** off. for context, how many people did you know personally that were killed in 7/7 or indeed 9/11?

[swaledale]

Swale "So your heartily sick of protests, a democratic way of showing dissent with what's happening with a government or governments? Yet so many of your hard won freedoms and rights wouldn't have been achieved without them!"

Indeed they were hard won - by my and your ancestors, peer groups etc. But they were hard won by british people for the benefit of the British citizens. Not by a bunch of wokes loonies and fringe minorities not interested in their own country but protesting in favour of one group of terrorists against in effect another group. Whatever the outcome it wont effect me so yes, Im sick of those particular protests as in no way can I relate to them any longer. My sympathy evaporated the minute "the cause" started killing british citizens in britain to demonstrate I know not what.

Mostly the protestors seem to be just a bunch of people with minimnal skin in the game and still less to do with their lives joining in on the bandwagon that makes themselves feel relevant. As has often been noted the LGBT community would be wiped out if it were to establish itself in an islamist state. Just a bunch of happy clappers.

there you go, I realise Ive used the expression british far too many times for your comfort, but simply this. When those people bring their war to these shores, and none of them come with clean hands, they can just **** off. for context, how many people did you know personally that were killed in 7/7 or indeed 9/11?

In 9/11 one person closely, though what's that got to do with protests? Your lumping together protests about what's happening in Gaza, with individuals who for whatever motivation decide to wreak violence and death on people only vaguely connected to it, if that is frankly bizarre. Those who commit atrocities for whatever "cause" are hardly the same as people who take part in peaceful protests.

How do you come to the conclusion that protesters aren't interested in their own country? Surely in many cases those protesting are concerned, if not actually angry that their own country and government is aiding and abetting or at the very least doing nothing to stop what is clearly a breach of International law on the part of the current Israeli government.

You will be claiming next that the UK should have done nothing when Hitler invaded Poland, after all that didn't affect British citizens and its very possible that the UK could have reached an agreement with Hitler. (whether that would have held is open to question obviously, but the principle behind what your saying remains).

I rather think the LGBT community aren't the only ones who would suffer in a strict Islamic state, as has often been shown in Iran, many people who aren't LGBT, even young women have suffered grievously. Not that I can see the relevance to this argument, other than you seem to be of the view that such people should shut up and appreciate the freedoms afforded by the UK. Freedoms which one has to point out were hard won and by protests, after many including people who have served this country in war time and other endeavours were treated disgracefully. Dismissing these people as happy clappers is a tad disrespectful.

I'd also point out that the suffragettes were considered loonies and worse in their time.

I'm puzzled by your "the cause" started killing British citizens in Britain to demonstrate what?" - not actually aware that protests resulted in that anymore than the IRA were protesting when killing British citizens and I had a close shave with those guys in Birmingham, having been in the Tavern in the Town an hour before it was bombed.

These aren't protesters, their usually called terrorists! There is a distinct difference, one which you seem to be rather muddled about. Those that in this instance are motivated by some Islamist or other creed that in any way suggests that killing or maiming people is a way of supporting the cause, aren't protesters as you well know.

Ah the word "woke", I'm sorry but by using that as a pejorative term, you've dismantled your own argument. Woke in its proper form means being aware of and against social injustice etc. I fear the grumpy old git in you has forgotten that those who campaigned for women's rights were "woke" in that sense. But then perhaps you would rather those rights hadn't been hard won? You certainly seemed peeved that LGBT people have won some rights for some reason. Personally they don't bother me at all.

Protest is democratic right, that acts as a way of those people who care showing that they care, sure there may well be some who join in for the fun, but its an important "safety valve" in a democracy and has in the past resulted in changes for the good.

Its your opinion that most protesters are just people with minimal skin in the game, fair enough, it might be partly true, after all weren't you claiming that many on the "Unite Britain" march were not inherently supporting the far right people who organised it and spoke at it? I'd quibble at the word most, but then its also true that many protesters believe deeply in the cause, deeply enough to campaign (I happen to know quite a few who do a lot of campaigning and they don't just go on protests).

You seem to be mixing up terrorism, with protesters? If one is protesting about the genocide being visited on the Palestinians thats hardly supporting terrorists, if they were protesting in favour of hamas, then you'd have a point.

Ah so your only concerned with what directly affects you? Fair enough, each to his own, though you do perhaps overlook the point that what the UK does or does not do in the international sphere, does have a direct affect on you. Its one very big reason we have had these terror attacks, perhaps the pro Palestine protesters have a point (after all historically the UK had a big part in creating the problem that exists). If the UK actually was more active in restraining or not actively selling weapons to Israel to massacre Palestinians, then who knows they might not have happened.

I'm genuinely puzzled that you equate a protest, with certain individuals or terrorist groups who commit these atrocities, I can't see the link here, there is no evidence the protests encouraged the attacks, it certainly wasn't protests that resulted in 7/7 or 9/11, that was fundamentalist maniacs reacting to what the UK and US predominantly were doing in the Middle East. Your making a connection that is tenuous to say the least.

[swaledale]

I imagine you’re talking of Lucy Connolly (not Collins) and we’ve been down this road before. It’s my opinion that someone who actively encourages what she did deserves what she got. Nothing remotely like ‘1984’.

Are you suggesting that her behaviour and what she advocated/incited was acceptable? Are you suggesting there was no ‘black hole’ inherited by Labour last year or that, following the banking crisis there wasn’t 14 years of Government incompetence? Five PM’s in that period might suggest otherwise.

If you are we disagree, but I’m really not sure of your point and I’m sorry but I don’t really understand your Row Z/mosh pit analogy regarding religion either.

I rather think as a self proclaimed Christian, he is inferring that us atheists/agnostics/humanists aren't qualified or sufficiently involved to understand the nuances of religious matters.

On the other hand he could just be posting his usual gibberish, who knows....or cares really, those of us with open and enquiring minds can recognise dogma and blinkered views when posted.

[ramAnag]

Re Lucy C, to make it easier, I don't defend her inflammatory rantings but I feel the punishment was not altogether proportionate. However that's past history now, so really no point debating her.

But how is her case any different to, say, radical Imams calling for followers to rise up and slay the infidel? I'm sure in the fullness of time Jihad al Shami will be shown to have been radicalised by one or more individuals and causes. What will happen to his mentors who could arguably be said to have successfully achieved what the likes of Lucy C failed to do. Those that influenced Jihad to act how he did are equally culpable for yesterday's actual murders - but will they face the weight of the law? We will see but I'm not putting money on it.

Jihad was just a pawn in a sinister game played by people far higher up the food chain - not excusing his actions but suggesting there are bigger wider issue in play here that will likely be placed under the carpet.

And so the process will continue and these attacks will not be isolated. Those who instigate them will remain in the shadows while the footsoldiers are sacrificed. There's always another volunteer to be persuaded and (based on performances so far) those "teachers" (no disrespect rA) will remain outside prosecution/deportation/whatever as a disruptive scar on our society, hell bent on ensuring that a harmonious diverse society will never happen. Muslim Farages if you will.

Yet Lucy C served her time, achieved nothing and noone will remember her name by this time next year (Andy's forgotten it already!).

The law punishes the stupid failures, they are easy targets, yet the real villains of this piece go undetected or unchallenged.

Hate to use the expression 2 tier justice (that epithet isn't Starmer's alone) it's more of a global challenge.

Okay, point by point.

Lucy Connolly. Glad we agree, up to a point, although I doubt she’s past history. Suspect she’ll continue to resurface as some sort of ridiculous Reform martyr.

Personally I agree there is little difference and I don’t disagree with your portrayal of ‘Muslim Farage’s’. All as bad as each other, as are some of the Jewish hierarchy hence my comments about fundamentalists and extremists. We should not forget however that Jihad al Shami is, justifiably, dead and the perpetrator of the Southport attack, equally justifiably, imprisoned for life. Hardly ‘2 tier justice’ then.

I’m not going to disagree with your comments about foot soldiers, volunteers, real villains etc either. That all too often seems to be the case, right from wartime scenarios through to organised crime.

Where I think we disagree is that, while I share your belief that all extremism works against the ‘harmonious, diverse society’ you speak of, you are allowing your anger and frustration to encourage you to side more with one (or two) particular groups (while demonising the other) and I am opposed to all forms of fundamentalist and extremist behaviour.

As regards Starmer…he doesn’t always get things right and there’s no point in pretending otherwise, but you immediately dragging him into this week’s Manchester response was, imo, uncalled for. He is just trying to stop the spread of ‘hate’. The exact opposite of Lucy Connolly and the radical Imams.

[SithHappens]

I tend to agree Connolly will be yesterday's news in a years time. Farage is milking her right now, once he's got his worth out of her, which is probably about now, he will discard her. She definitely won't be guest of honour at next year's conference (her appearance at this year's was utterly disgusting).

She better not be on im a celeb, or strictly. Not that I watch either.