kevinjohnsonmbe

At last! something we can agree upon Let the face punching commence! (In a "non-violent" Alt-Left sense of course) Dhoooooh! We still can't agree on what modern fascism is.... I think it's perpetuated by the likes of YOU!

This is worth a laugh: https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/9975/Rage as Nick Griffin walks free A favourite quote from the piece: "...Anti-fascists cannot rely on the judicial system to stop the BNP. The case underlines the importance of supporting Unite activity on the ground..." So, no conviction for racism after due legal process = take direct action... what a twt! Id laugh my ttts off if you were found guilty of libel - unless of course you can find an example of a successful prosecution for racism? Im not hoisting a flag for BNP / Nick Griffin, just in case someone has a hissy fit, just asking how you think it's ok to behave in such bullish manner but feel so outraged by anyone else (e.g. NG) doing the same? Doesn't it make the likes of you just as bad / worse than - you know, like people in glass houses an all that....

You know the trees Khriss? Its been a but bit quiet on this thread since I've been away and haven't really followed it up. Been a few emails but it hasn't got any better. Back on it tomorrow and will update!

It's an illusion! Gary knows better!!

It'd be a close run thing! You'd have to have a shower first you smelly drain dweller!

You know him? Or are you talking out of your tea-towel holder again? Prey tell... How do define "far-right?" (if you can) Is it what ever YOU don't like? That would certainly fit with the classic "shout down and attempt to denigrate that which isn't 'our' view of the world which seems to typify the UAF/antifa MO. Attempting to suppress free thought and speech - sound familiar - oh, the irony! So in your book, the Pope, the Arch Bishop of Canterbury, Trevor Phillips (to name just a few) and of course all the other "far right" commentators are wrong and you are the only voice of sanity in an otherwise deluded world? Talking about the difference between asylum and immigration, immigration & asylum quotas or points systems, islamification, foreign policy, multiculturalism et al, does not make a rascist even though the likes of UAF/antifa like to throw the label around like it should be a badge of shame. Yeah, good luck with that, it's been over used and abused and no longer provides an unquestionable blanket suppression to debate. "Glamourising the far-right?" How so? The "must read" comment was a cut & paste from the LSE book review. If (a) I didn't already have a long list of folks wanting a lend-loan and (b) I didn't think it'd be wasted on you, I'd send you a copy and ask you to highlight any rascist content. If I had the choice of having a beer with you or Tommy Robinson I'd be at the bar with him every time, the alternative holds no appeal whatsoever!

Purely coincidental, but followed the above with Tommy Robinson's "Enemy of the State" The obvious and wholly expected "London wine bar liberal" critique of the book by LSE (http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2016/03/02/book-review-enemy-of-the-state-by-tommy-robinson/) firmly illustrates the failure of "the establishment" and poncy liberal tossers to grasp a situation from a perspective other than their own. Certainly no challenging read, it is the story of a football hooligan, in his own words mind, so no need to find a quiet corner and wrap a damp towel round your noggin. ...this book should be on the reading list of anyone who is concerned about social cohesion in Britain, or simply committed to rerum cognoscere causas... But be prepared to challenge your view of the EDL as a "far-right, fascist, xenophobic hotbed of intolerance and extremism" as universally portrayed by MSM - despite the best efforts and as described in the first person by the author. Unless of course, you already have the type of closed mind and bully-boy fascist, anti-freedom of expression that is the trade mark of UAF and antifa.

He's a rough old Yorky Mark! It'll take a bit of time for him to adjust to the more cultured and nuanced characteristics of the "gentler" South Western hospitality!! Give it time, once he's whittled himself a pair of clogs and been ferreting he'll be more approachable!

I chose that example specially because it's not "my team", so, hopefully demonstrating a degree of impartiality (although I take your point about it being "the opposition"). I'm happy to accept that men (or women) of far greater intellect, intelligence and experience, those that have dedicated their lives to study, thought and meditation, such as a former Holy See, might actually be able to rise above the petty intolerances and ignorance of the masses to achieve a clearer appreciation of the global scenario. Maybe you can example an Islamic equivalent?

Yeah, they only lasted a fortnight in glorious Kernow before the natives scared 'em off! I'll still track you down even if it means me having to venture over the Tamar!! Good luck and best wishes for the new venture

How far back do you want to go? And how "un-far-right-wing" examples would satisfy? Pope John Paul II: "...John Paul had increasingly spoken harshly about Islam and the dangers he believed it contained in its fundamentalist form. Visiting the Olivetti factory at Ivera, Italy, John Paul had astonished the workers by inserting into his speech an impromptu passage: "What the Koran teaches people is aggression; what we teach our people is peace. Of course you always have human nature which distorts whatever message religion is sending. But even though people can be led astray by vices and bad habits, Christianity aspires to peace and love. Islam is a religion that attacks. If you start by teaching aggression to a whole community, you end up pandering to the negative elements in everyone. You know what that leads to: such people will assualt us..."" Ill leave you to cross check / reference it, and decide if is from a suitable source.... PS that was BEFORE he was shot by an Iranian trained & sponsored Islamic fundamentalist BTW

Oi, oi, oi, oi......! You're not slipping that one in without being pulled up! I won't have you put yourself down like that!

He knows he knows that you know that he knows what you mean..... We're not falling for that!

That was exactly what I meant Ed. That's not a quote from the LA strategic plan is it Ed??? As do we all! I won't argue that that which has been sold as "austerity measures" has been wholly effective (it would be foolish to do so since the numbers don't really stack up) but I might think (a) that I welcome the consequential examination and scrutiny of historic processes which has resulted in saving where previously there was waste / inefficiency and (b) I reject the Labour party stance of simply throwing more (borrowed) money at the problem without examining the problem first. I like your parable Ed, it's entirely appropriate..... But you started at the end rather than at the beginning! In the beginning, the donkey was lean, keen, efficient and effective.... He worked hard and was appreciated by his master for the valuable contribution he made... The donkey enjoyed the benefits of a reasonable work / life balance, he was secure in the knowledge that he would have some work everyday (but not too much) and his reward was adequate. If he needed kit, equipment or additional training for a task, it was provided and he didn't even have to work any harder to get it, often, he'd even get his training AND his pay, but didn't have to do the days work as well! He was a VERY HAPPY donkey - one of the best looked after donkeys in the paddock. If he was sick he would be taken care of, he had plenty of rest and holiday where he'd still be fed and watered but didn't need to do any work. The donkey knew his long term plan was safe and that he'd be provided for in his later life where he would gradually slide into the twilight of his years in comfort and contentment. What the donkey didn't realise, was that his master was BORROWING the money he needed for all the advantages the donkey was enjoying over and above his fellows in the paddock. He was a kind and generous master that did whatever was necessary to keep as many people as possible happy so that they all liked him. One day however, the donkey's master realised he'd made an almighty ass (giggle) of the whole thing. He'd spent way too much money trying to keep people happy. He hadn't saved any of the surplus money he had earned whilst business was good. He'd sold the family gold. He'd borrowed way too much money and now he couldn't borrow any more. The donkey's master, Gordon, had made an almighty balls up of the entire happy situation. One of his friends left a note saying there was no money left and that Gordon had to go back to the barren lands in the North. The donkey's new master was astounded to see how Gordon had behaved so recklessly and then run away. The new master faced a serious decision - should he be like Gordon and "find" more money to keep people liking him, or should he try to be just a little bit more responsible - after all, it wasn't his money he was spending! Don't be like Gordon, Gordon made an ass of it..... (cheered me up writing that! Big of a giggle!! It needs some VI or Steve or Eggs input for the 'middle' before we get to your 'end')

There's a book for that Gary, if more "arb's" had a copy.... (notwithstanding the debate about it being perceived as being cost prohibitive!) I think the issue (at least in part - and the golden key to the opposite argument is "central government funds are cut so we have to do less") is that LA's aren't driven to seek more efficient / streamlined processes in the same way that the commercial sector is. For you and me, time is money, for public sector, the money is the same regardless how the day is filled. There's no incentive to make the day more efficient, perhaps even the opposite could be true where staff and resources are under scrutiny - more workload appears to be a safeguard to the status quo whereas if you can't appear to fill your day, you're under threat.

Could I ask a couple of questions here....? What I'm reading here "appears" to be a case for a points based system of immigration. There's no denying that appropriate skill shortages filled by appropriately skilled migrants, for a predetermined period, is an advantage to the receiving country (we'll have to leave a side for the moment the potential for brain drain in the donor country.) Is it possible that the nation could have a sensible debate about immigration without one section of society seeming to scream Nazi, Fascist, xenophobe if anybody mentions limits / quota's, timescales and the other sector not seeking to demonise all of a particular cultural / religious group? That would be a start.... ....towards remedying the obvious disadvantages of long term, uncontrolled, unrestricted immigration that has resulted in the current dysfunctional, potentially explosive situation that prevails? And separating migration from asylum. Why, for example, does asylum = citizenship rather than refuge and return? If we continue down the current path it will end in tears.

I hear you Bro! I hide it well, but there's a fairly generous dose of (l) liberal social democrat in my thinking....

You mean 'im on LBC Mr E? He does talk some sense, and he can certainly quote and interpret scripture 'an that, and holds no sway with Islamist apologist etc, what with 'im having been an Islamist an all. Quite like his show, find myself agreeing and disagreeing in almost equal measure. Prefer Farage's show though.... never manage to find any issue with what Sir Nigel presents

Made a slight amend, hope you don't mind.... the evidence of patience having already ready run out is displayed (almost) daily on our TV screens... Absolutely agree with you, "tribes" evolve to suit their prevailing circumstances - that's perfectly reasonable, evolutionary progression. Those evolutionary characteristics are best suited to the location they have evolved to exist in. Superiority (over others that have not evolved in that location) is inevitable. No good trying to fight it, nature will always prevail.

PS just had a pair of TPO app's approved at week 6, never happened before 8th week before, BZ LA (just got some scheduling issues to overcome now)

Looking online at the abysmal standard of some of the TPO apps that are validated and processed by my LA, and therefore take up TO / PO time & resource to consult on, I can't help thinking a good chunk of time could be saved by an early rejection of inadequate submissions rather than letting them progress through the system exhausting resources along the way to the inevitable refusal. But there in lies some of the problem with most public sector organisations - they need to show "workload" to safeguard jobs / resources so it would be foolish to find ways of reducing loading and become more efficient because that could result in less staff / resource. Hate to say it, but maybe it IS time that 211/TPO apps were a pay to use service, might result in some better standard submissions.

Amen!

If only I believed you.....

Mark, we've had some banter and some fairly enthusiastic disagreements, but I just can't find the energy, enthusiasm or interest to engage with you. We're just too far removed to make it worthwhile. No disrespect, we'll both just be banging our heads against a wall. Maybe another time / another place...

We've locked horns in the past, and that's all cool, we're all allowed to disagree (despite what some radical factions might believe) but you've got the measure of this...