Gibber Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Gollywogs indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unlinkedstudent Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 ... It started in force with Toh-nee and his Human Rights Hag, Cheri, and unfortunately what should have been - and still is - a basic humanitarian view of our society has been hijacked by an entire industry, in the red corner, and the Daily Mail/Sun/other rag-waving "I'm not racist, but..." Nick Griffin-likes in the true Blue corner. ... Nooooo, it started waayyyy wayyy wayyyyyyy wayyyy wayyyy before the Colgate Kid - I remember the days of the GLC and Red Ken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.S Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 But Red Ken was only regional. On a national level, he was a Spitting Image puppet, a figure of ridicule. I have to agree, legislation- wise it was the Blair mob that started screwing things up wholesale, on a national and legislative level. In their first 8 years in office, they introduced something like 300 new or revised laws (around 10 times the average amount for a sitting Government) and created around 300,000 public sector jobs out of thin air. All these Hand Washing Outreach Advisers, and Anti-Smoking Advisers and Co-ordinators... that's code for bought and paid for voters, working towards the "Nanny State". Ask folk in the NHS about the new bureaucracy that swallowed up all the funds that could have gone in patient care, etc. i know at least one senior medical professional that felt driven out by their idiocy and the problems they created for the sake of it! They now work in another country, where at least they don't have folk with no knowledge of medicine or medical procedures, treatments and the needs of the patient, telling them what they should be doing and what they cannot do "because the funds aren't there". If you and your kind weren't in your redundant jobs, mate, maybe that money, so badly needed, WOULD be available. Tony & Gordon did their best to finish what the Tories started, with the public sector, and it STILL continues now. These people are interchangeable. The policies don't seem to change much though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorrie Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 By the by, I'm not commenting on the gollywogs, but by extension of your argument, if I am walking down a street and see a group of teens calling your mother/wife/daughter a slut, a slag and a filthy whore, just for being female, pardon me for being "patronising" enough to be offended at their behaviour and take issue with them. How I choose to do that is up to me. If a group of teens or anyone else for that matter was acting aggressive to anyone I would hope you like me would offended, but on the whole if they are just throwing out some childish names then I know my wife like me would walk on and regret the society created by a bunch of liberal lefty apologists that prevents me from giving them a good clip round the ear for their cheek.......... So you'd 'tut' tut' and do nothing whilst blaming your woes upon upon the nebulous 'them' who stop you from planting the obnoxious oiks? No doubt to be immediately followed up by online wailing upon some forum such as this? Sounds like a cop out to me, Dratsy. Take charge, man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shetlandpeat Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Let us try this, I don't think violence upon children is warranted from a stranger.Dratsy, I will add it to your other comments, single mothers and murdering auld folk to save money. No doubt some more will follow. I don't have to be violent to stop a situation, that shows a lack of thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.S Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 You mean you advocate violence against children, shetlandpeat? It's not quite clear from your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorrie Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 It's getting better all the time....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohanofNess Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 You mean you advocate violence against children, shetlandpeat? It's not quite clear from your post. Last edited by shetlandpeat on Tue Mar 20, 2012 7:06 pm; edited 3 times in total Did any of the 3 edits clear it up or just confuse the issue further Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.S Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Scorrie's evidently sitting with a drink and a bowl of popcorn, enjoying the show... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorrie Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Scorrie's evidently sitting with a drink and a bowl of popcorn, enjoying the show... glug...glug....nomnom.....munch.... urp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 I don't think violence upon children is warranted from a stranger. I take it Jack and the Beanstalk got banned on but violence and racist grounds then?!? Fee, fie, fo, fum,I smell the blood of an English man,Be he alive, or be he dead,I'll grind his bones to make my bread The bones of an English woman, personally, I see as a whole different matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoots Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Peat, does that mean that violence towards children from a NON-stranger is alright, in your book? And that's after 3 edits. The committee minutes are obviously addling you tonight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoots Posted March 20, 2012 Report Share Posted March 20, 2012 Naw, you're right, peat. You don't have to be violent to sort a situation. Of course, it all depends upon the situation and the other parties involved. If they choose to adopt violence, well then.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorrie Posted March 21, 2012 Report Share Posted March 21, 2012 Violence has always sorted out problems since the beginning of mankind. Who are we to go against tradition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shetlandpeat Posted March 21, 2012 Report Share Posted March 21, 2012 That shows quite well in other countries, the fear of violence being the reason for folk to prepare for such violence. It could also open the door to a raft of other actions.Still, beating up folk, or risking any form of injury because of personal prejudice is quite wrong. Nothing wrong with edits, it reduced double or treble posts. A last though in respect to US comment about Community Councils, Councillors and the like, if you worked in said departments for public bodies and been to such meetings, why did you not know that PACT and Matac meetings went on, I naturally thought that you had not known anything about such meetings in response to you exclamations. I.S. A councillor should make representations, in a fair manner for all parties involved. There will be times of course if the majority of folk who elected him are against the actions of another in that ward or a particular area, they would speak out, as a representative of that body of people. In situations of a lack of neighbourly love, they may not be the best. This should be left to those who are more experienced and non-biased. From what you have said, you seem to have been let down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now