|
|
Post by Dubdrifter on Sept 19, 2023 9:21:39 GMT
<< deleted>>
… apologies … thread mix-up ….
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Sept 19, 2023 9:36:53 GMT
To be fair to Zany, the mental contortions he has to go through in attempting to rationalise the asylum system as it is presently implemented, merely reflect the normative narrative as propagated by the opinion-forming class.
In this scheme the presence of a tiny fraction of people fearing death, as he puts it, even though that fraction will be zero in the case of 'refugees' arriving from France, is enough to invalidate the obvious truth that the overwhelming majority are opportunists and chancers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Sept 19, 2023 10:01:35 GMT
It's impossible to have a discussion without a common language One conservative tax policy = hard right government Nah, Conservatism is centre right. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 19, 2023 10:25:14 GMT
NOTE: When Russia is attacked to the point it only has nuclear weapons left …. here is what you need to learn about a nuclear blast in Britain and Europe … from a medical perspective. Nobody has attacked Russia or even threatened them. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Sept 19, 2023 10:31:43 GMT
To be fair to Zany, the mental contortions he has to go through in attempting to rationalise the asylum system as it is presently implemented, merely reflect the normative narrative as propagated by the opinion-forming class. In this scheme the presence of a tiny fraction of people fearing death, as he puts it, even though that fraction will be zero in the case of 'refugees' arriving from France, is enough to invalidate the obvious truth that the overwhelming majority are opportunists and chancers. Just on security grounds alone, the idea makes perfect sense. It's hard for me to see how people can honestly insist on a kind of 'open door to all unidentified people' policy on the grounds that doing anything else is somehow abusive. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Sept 19, 2023 11:16:47 GMT
I posted this piece below around midnight last night … and by this morning it had been surreptitiously removed with no warning or explanation?? … Why?? …. Does the U.S./NATO Deep State Cabal not want Humanity to see the true real medical hypothetical consequences a nuclear bomb can deliver? This video passed Youtube’s Terms and Conditions on appropriate viewing … why has this adult Forum and ProBoards suddenly adopted stricter CENSORSHIP than Youtube?? This is really unacceptable … and the important contents of this video needs discussion here … where it’s relevancy is right on topic. NATO pushing for nuclear conflict in Ukraine since 2014. … their Pentagon computer prediction modelling must have come up that this scenario we now face is REAL … so why did NATO go down this route in the first place? … are they certifiably INSANE?! … Remember the BBC Documentary “The War Game” … NATO Hawks engineered the pulling of that documentary from BBC Television. … because it made them look CRAZY …. here we have more inappropriate censorship … and history repeating.Check out the video below … for Humanitarians here … it’s a ‘must see’. (The most important post I have ever had the misfortune to have to drop.) ************** NOTE: When Russia is attacked to the point it only has nuclear weapons left …. here is what you need to learn about a nuclear blast in Britain and Europe … from a medical perspective. The most depressing and grim but informative educational video on nuclear blast injuries and radiation sickness you will ever see - broken down and analysed in detail by orthopaedic surgeon Dr Chris Raynor The war-mongering Collectives bringing us to the brink of destruction should be forced to watch this. 🤔 __NATO pushing for nuclear conflict in Ukraine since 2014.""__ That comment is pure opinion. You will not be able to show any absolute proof of its correctness. Putin was the first individual to suggest the use of nuclear war in or over Ukraine. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Sept 19, 2023 11:37:07 GMT
It's impossible to have a discussion without a common language One conservative tax policy = hard right government Nah, Conservatism is centre right. Conservatism is: Centre-Right, Right, Hard-Right and Fascist-Right. The variations that one way or another inhabit all broad church political groups. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Sept 19, 2023 11:59:36 GMT
Fascists are not Conservatives even if they pretend to be.
Real Conservatives believe in human rights.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Sept 19, 2023 12:27:13 GMT
They do? Human rights as currently imagined didn't exist until 1948. Does that mean there were no Conservatives before then?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Sept 19, 2023 12:30:53 GMT
To be fair to Zany, the mental contortions he has to go through in attempting to rationalise the asylum system as it is presently implemented, merely reflect the normative narrative as propagated by the opinion-forming class. In this scheme the presence of a tiny fraction of people fearing death, as he puts it, even though that fraction will be zero in the case of 'refugees' arriving from France, is enough to invalidate the obvious truth that the overwhelming majority are opportunists and chancers. Just on security grounds alone, the idea makes perfect sense. It's hard for me to see how people can honestly insist on a kind of 'open door to all unidentified people' policy on the grounds that doing anything else is somehow abusive.
As a great Englishman once said: "The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils".
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Sept 19, 2023 12:44:35 GMT
Hard right .
Thinks that their country has its own culture and wants to preserve it.
Opposes excessive immigration and expects immigrants to respect the culture of the country that nourishes them .
Opposes the idea that a bloke in a dress is a woman
Thinks that the nuclear family with a man and a woman as parents is the ideal.
Respects Christian values .
We need more of them .
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Sept 19, 2023 12:53:02 GMT
They do? Human rights as currently imagined didn't exist until 1948. Does that mean there were no Conservatives before then? Human rights 'as they are currently imagined' are not conservative. This is part of the linguistic hijacking. People had a notion of human rights before 1948 and quite a few of these people were conservatives. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Sept 19, 2023 18:09:34 GMT
Zany, You use the analogy that you object to slavery, but here you are objecting to a plan to (by your latter argument) enslave nobody - ie a plan not to enslave anyone. This is far from the first time you have been caught contradicting yourself on this particular issue - ie asylum and illegal entry to the UK. This agile maneuvering, allied with your totally reliable and steadfast objection to anything that would act significantly to prevent it, are reasons I don't take your protestation that you want something done about it very seriously. You will shift on any issue to raise on objection to acting and will remain stationary exactly where you need to do the same. In this case you have ended up in a pile of contradictions. In my view, you want the the UK public to continue to have this problem and will find an insoluble objection (if you can) to anything that might correct it I give up. You are to dim to talk to. My objection to slavery was an example of something I can object to that doesn't currently exist. It was not a claim your idea enslaved people. Adding "In my view" does not change the fact you are telling me what I think. Enough. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Sept 19, 2023 18:17:37 GMT
To be fair to Zany, the mental contortions he has to go through in attempting to rationalise the asylum system as it is presently implemented, merely reflect the normative narrative as propagated by the opinion-forming class. In this scheme the presence of a tiny fraction of people fearing death, as he puts it, even though that fraction will be zero in the case of 'refugees' arriving from France, is enough to invalidate the obvious truth that the overwhelming majority are opportunists and chancers. Shame on you. You are intelligent. You know there are two separate arguments here. 1, Locking up everyone with the excuse that some are criminals is inhuman. 2, Forcing Europe to take all the asylum seekers and not having our share is immoral. Still if it pleases the right wing on here so be it. I find it amusing that the right wing talk of being oppressed and not having their views counted by the left wing bureaucrats, while wanting intolerance for so many other groups from LGBT to transgender. From Gays to Muslims. We want freedom from the left, but we don't want to share it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2023 18:25:07 GMT
I give up. You are to dim to talk to. Priceless, Zany.  |
|
