Laurence Fox home raided this am (Blade runner comments?)
Discussion
Vanden Saab said:
That describes his position perfectly. He then as a matter of course will claim you are a fanboi when you point out police overreach and political side taking. At the same time being completely blind to cases like Harvey Proctor.
No smoke without fire.
Okay, so we're onto another name. What happened or did not happen here we should be angry about?No smoke without fire.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Have we had Niemöller yet?
"First they came for Lord Haw-Haw.."
Some of you have jumped the fking shark.
Is this going to be yet another instance where you tediously invent things to be outraged about that nobody has said, or are you going to calm down? Nobody has said anything about defending Lord bloody Haw-Haw's "right to free speech". "First they came for Lord Haw-Haw.."
Some of you have jumped the f
king shark.My point was that the British government wanted to do him in, the country absolutely hated him and I doubt anyone shed ay tears when he was hanged - but I suspect that if that trial was run today he'd be acquitted as the definition of "subject" was pushed past the limit. However as ZedLeg says, he probably held a 1940s doctorate in fking around and finding out.
isaldiri said:
You do realise that people can disagree with the process involved with executing someone (however unpleasant) without agreeing or being aligned with that person right....? Or perhaps you really don't actually because as long as it's happening to the 'wrong' people you don't care whatever about whatever that might be done.
Emotional thinkers Vs rational thinkers. Completely different mindsets that can't be reconciled.Tankrizzo said:
Is this going to be yet another instance where you tediously invent things to be outraged about that nobody has said, or are you going to calm down? Nobody has said anything about defending Lord bloody Haw-Haw's "right to free speech".
My point was that the British government wanted to do him in, the country absolutely hated him and I doubt anyone shed ay tears when he was hanged - but I suspect that if that trial was run today he'd be acquitted as the definition of "subject" was pushed past the limit. However as ZedLeg says, he probably held a 1940s doctorate in fking around and finding out.
I'm quite calm.My point was that the British government wanted to do him in, the country absolutely hated him and I doubt anyone shed ay tears when he was hanged - but I suspect that if that trial was run today he'd be acquitted as the definition of "subject" was pushed past the limit. However as ZedLeg says, he probably held a 1940s doctorate in fking around and finding out.
Slightly puzzled when Lord Haw-Haw turned into a victim but hey every day is a school day.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Proctor was treated appallingly badly by the Met from what I heard which wasn't much but I remember a lengthy interview he did with Iain Dale.
He got caught up in the "Nick" stuff about the non-existent Westminster Paedophile ring.
Any idea how it relates to some twonk inciting criminal damage on Twitter? Or are we just listing out general miscarriages of justice?He got caught up in the "Nick" stuff about the non-existent Westminster Paedophile ring.
ZedLeg said:
On the lord haw haw stuff, it's fairly black and white isn't it? He was a UK citizen or subject or whatever the right old timey language is who went and made propaganda for a country we were at war with.
I'm by no means a fan of the death penalty but isn't this just yet another example of someone who fked around before abruptly finding out?
The argument made was that he was never a British subject. While not having any sympathy for him, I don't think miscarriages of justice cease to be a concern when the victim is a despicable person.I'm by no means a fan of the death penalty but isn't this just yet another example of someone who f
ked around before abruptly finding out?
Vanden Saab said:
police overreach and political side taking.
Think you're overstating it somewhat. What should the police have done when confronted by someone broadcasting about how they've broken the law, are colluding with someone else to encourage and allow others to do so and fully expect to get arrested for it?Not so much overreach as the easiest arrest all week I would have thought and politics doesn't even come into it unless you have a particular conspiracy nut axe to grind
ZedLeg said:
isaldiri said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I can just imagine some of you lot back in WWII.
Probably on a March defending Joyce’s right to free speech and refusing to draw your curtains at night because the state won’t tell you what to do.
Bloody hell.
You do realise that people can disagree with the process involved with executing someone (however unpleasant) without agreeing or being aligned with that person right....? Or perhaps you really don't actually because as long as it's happening to the 'wrong' people you don't care whatever about whatever that might be done. Probably on a March defending Joyce’s right to free speech and refusing to draw your curtains at night because the state won’t tell you what to do.
Bloody hell.
I originally brought him up not to defend him, but to point out that people getting their heads shot off for sticking them above the parapet is hardly a new thing.
He was an absolute scumbag of course, but did he deserve to be executed just for talking in radio transmissions when other far, far more involved in the running of the Third Reich got off with relatively short prison sentences?
It seems to me that his execution was as much for being the recognisable voice of the regime as anything else - a logical place from which to extract vengeance.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I can just imagine some of you lot back in WWII.
Probably on a March defending Joyce’s right to free speech and refusing to draw your curtains at night because the state won’t tell you what to do.
Bloody hell.
Genuine question, and not trying to score points: what do you think you would have been like in the 1930s?Probably on a March defending Joyce’s right to free speech and refusing to draw your curtains at night because the state won’t tell you what to do.
Bloody hell.
bodhi said:
Random Account No6 said:
Quite a few posts starting with Genuine question
Read into that what you will.
I'm reading into that people are asking genuine questions? Read into that what you will.
"I'm not racist but" = "I am a xenophobe of the highest order who will become concerned for my property values if my white neighbours happen to pick up a bit of a tan on holiday".
Starting a phrase with "Genuine question" = "I am about to pose an outrageous rhetorical question which has been ineptly designed to foist my unacceptable views upon you in such a way as to let me claim I was only asking a question should the flame war on Twitter not go the way I was expecting."
"No, please, after you" = "You utter throbber! Can you not see that I'm an important person in a hurry! Doesn't your wheelchair do reverse?"
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff