Far-right and anti-racism protesters scuffle in London

[evadgib]

Just now, Rookiescot said:

Poor Tommy. Always victimised even though he is a poor peaceful visionary trying to bring hope and reconciliation to us all. 

He ate John Sweeney for breakfast but i'm not sure we need another deviation in that direction.

[Krataiboy]

7 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

So Johnson is not the "Tough on crime" PM you expected him to be?

If he were, the jails would be bulging with Antifa thugs and other extremists who have hijacked the  Black Lives Matter protest to pursue their nefarious agendas.

[Rookiescot]

4 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

What dont you understand about "Everyone and anyone" ?

Excellent, so you do condemn the racist thugs from Parliament square.

Thank you for that.

[sungod]

3 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

I utterly condemn anyone setting fire to any flag.

Will you also condemn anyone assaulting a police officer?

Yes I can.

 

Can you see there are double standards applied by the police?

[CorpusChristie]

9 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Excellent, so you do condemn the racist thugs from Parliament square.

Thank you for that.

 

*Everyone*

pronoun

every person; everybody.

 

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/everyone

 

[Loiner]

1 hour ago, elliss said:

 

   Was our Tommy there, in the front line.

      Peaceful protests , are his speciality ..

Why do you feel that he ought to have been there? He could well have been there for BLM, as he will happily tell you, many of his friends and supporters are black. It’s like that in Luton. 

You are confusing exposing police and officials coverups of grooming gangs with racism. 

 

[kingdong]

5 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

What is amazing is a guy who came to protect memorials has a pee up against a memorial.

I wonder how many of those patriots had to relieve themselves on the other statues and memorials.

He had a skinfull and got caught short not many public conveniences around parliament.

[torturedsole]

11 hours ago, vogie said:

‘I am concerned that the gesture of kneeling, though prompted by the best instincts, might give the perception of undermining the role of the police in such situations,’ he said last week. 

If I kneeled at work in a political gesture then my employer would 100% issue me a written warning, at the very least.  

 

Dress-down Friday must also comply with no overt clothing labels and/or representing sporting or political affiliations.  

 

My employer loves me and loves all my persuasions - as long as they're legal - but I leave those personal persuasions at the entrance to the office and pick them up on the way out at 5pm.  

 

That's how it should be and my employer is entirely correct to insist that I'm seen to be impartial during my contractual hours.  

 

Being a policeman/woman used to command respect but that's sadly no longer the case and, even more worryingly, are now choosing sides based on their personal political convictions rather than upholding the law.  That's their <deleted> job.  

 

 

[MaxYakov]

Why is it always the "far-right"?

 

Maybe they are people who do not like unruly and potentially violent crowds who are generally not wearing masks and are not doing anti-social distancing.

 

How far to the right does one have to be to be "far-right" or are they always "far-right" regardless of their actual political stances (i.e. not leftists or "far-leftists")?

[simple1]

11 minutes ago, MaxYakov said:

Why is it always the "far-right"?

 

Maybe they are people who do not like unruly and potentially violent crowds who are generally not wearing masks and are not doing anti-social distancing.

 

How far to the right does one have to be to be "far-right" or are they always "far-right" regardless of their actual political stances (i.e. not leftists or "far-leftists")?

Met Police, PM and so on have named the far right for targeting BLM  and police with violence, as well as chanting racist comments.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/14/met-police-condemns-mindless-hooliganism-far-right-protesters-london

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/13/black-lives-matter-protests-london-statues-racism-churchill/

 

There are various definitions for today's far right, some info below. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics

[MaxYakov]

10 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Met Police, PM and so on have named the far right for targeting BLM  and police with violence, as well as chanting racist comments.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/14/met-police-condemns-mindless-hooliganism-far-right-protesters-london

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/13/black-lives-matter-protests-london-statues-racism-churchill/

 

There are various definitions for today's far right, some info below. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics

Thanks for your comment and the links (especially the Guardian), but, sorry, you earned a big loud Clunk for missing the point of my comment entirely (IMHO, of course).

 

For reference purposes, my original comment to which you responded is HERE.

 

 

 

Edited June 16, 2020 by MaxYakov

[MaxYakov]

4 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Please enlighten me, what is the point you were making?

I guess I have to spell out the media propaganda for you. In the leftist press and elsewhere anyone who is not a leftist or disagrees with a leftist political position is summarily deemed a "far-right" opposer regardless of their actual political beliefs. A simple "right-wing" political opponent opponent doesn't exist. It's always "far-right". It's a term that has been over-used that it has become meaningless.

[Nigel Garvie]

4 hours ago, kingdong said:

He had a skinfull and got caught short not many public conveniences around parliament.

Thank you for providing me with a new unit of measurement 1 skinfull = 16 pints. (Oh the glorious Imperial measurement system)

I'm unlikely to use it personally at my age, but it's good to know! ????

[pineapple01]

And still no comments about why no protests in Africa outside Victorian/ Colonial style Buildings funded by African Slave Traders and built by African Slaves. Or is the Question not to the Mobs liking.?

[Nigel Garvie]

9 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

Or the Marxist BLM gang, Antifa, Hope not Hate, anti semites and quite a few labour MP's

Wow, on the rampage tonight!

BLM is a vast, now worldwide, movement condemning injustice against black people.............its about race

Marxism is a political philosophy,  adhered to by a tiny insignificant bunch of academics and their students...............it is about equality of distribution of power and wealth. 

The idea of Marxists controlling BLM is like the idea of a rabbit controlling a train. 

But please, give me some evidence.

 

Hope not Hate's main activity was condemning rabid press like the Daily Seig Heil, for featuring endless twisted stories inspiring stupid ignorant people to hate immigrants. 

It appears that you would prefer Hate not Hope.

 

[nauseus]

52 minutes ago, Throatwobbler said:

All I see when I read this thread is a lot of old scared white men worried that their bigoted view of the world is being shown to be wrong. If you don’t think these posters are bigots just go and read any of the posts about Thais and see the hatred and bigotry that is spouted on all those posts.

I guess I will get a harsh response to this but I guess most of you will not want to hear some honest truths about yourselves.

All I see when I read posts like this is a sad soul who wouldn't recognise the truth if it knocked him out of his pushchair.

[metisdead]

Some posts in which the quoted content had been selectively altered and the replies have been removed. 

 

Some offensive posts and off topic deflection posts and the replies have been removed. 

[simple1]

19 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

In your opinion, do you feel that not giving the police the password to your telephone, is an act of terrorism ?

  A yes or no reply will be sufficient 

The guy was found guilty for action contrary to Section 7 of the Terrorism Act. Got a problem, someone might be interested, but not me, so kindly cease your harassment on this matter.

Edited June 16, 2020 by simple1

[CorpusChristie]

7 minutes ago, simple1 said:

The guy was found guilty for action contrary to Section 7 of the Terrorism Act. Got a problem, someone might be interested, but not me, so kindly cease your harassment on this matter.

Yes, but I was asking you whether you felt that it was justified , whether you feel that not giving your password to the police makes that person a terrorist .

[simple1]

7 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

Yes, but I was asking you whether you felt that it was justified , whether you feel that not giving your password to the police makes that person a terrorist .

Bye

Edited June 16, 2020 by simple1

[FarangULong]

5 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

Wow, on the rampage tonight!

BLM is a vast, now worldwide, movement condemning injustice against black people.............its about race

Marxism is a political philosophy,  adhered to by a tiny insignificant bunch of academics and their students...............it is about equality of distribution of power and wealth. 

The idea of Marxists controlling BLM is like the idea of a rabbit controlling a train. 

But please, give me some evidence.

 

Hope not Hate's main activity was condemning rabid press like the Daily Seig Heil, for featuring endless twisted stories inspiring stupid ignorant people to hate immigrants. 

It appears that you would prefer Hate not Hope.

 

They are condemning something that does not exist in the US, nor in the UK, etc. They're using it as an excuse to loot, riot, and as a launchpad to attack other things, they deem "racist", "intolerable", etc. Such as a great opportunity, to attack, dismantle, deface and throw into the river statues of controversial figures.

 

Here are some facts for you, some of which I have posted previously, which you (and others, incl. BLM & the media) conveniently ignore or dismiss, as they do not suit your narrative:

 

Last year in the US TWICE as many unarmed White people were shot dead by police, than unarmed Black people.

Also many more armed Whites.

 

I know, that your next "argument" will be, that there are far more Whites than Blacks, which is true, but it only serves to show how much bs media & blm are peddling, when you know (and are capably of understanding these numbers/statistics) that:

 

Blacks are 13% (not 15%, as I previously estimated) of the total US population. Approx. half of those are males. And of these males, the vast majority of crimes are being committed by the 16-35 (maybe to 40) age group. So that's AT MOST 5% of the total population.

 

These AT MOST 5% commit more than 50% of ALL violent crimes (murder, manslaughter, attempted murder, GBH, [armed] robberies, etc.), and commit approx. 52% of all murders. Murdered/killed Blacks are the victims of other Black men in over 80% of cases. A White person is EIGHT TIMES more likely to be assaulted by Black person, than vice versa. A White person is TWELVE TIMES more likely to be robbed by Black person, than vice versa.

 

Where is the outrage over all of this? Is it only "racism" if the "offender" (or cop) is White, and the victim (or "victim" in many of these police shootings) is Black? Is it only a problem, if the person on the receiving end is Black?

 

Since neighbourhoods with a lot of crime (esp. violent crime) have a larger police presence, and more pro-active policing, Blacks have FAR MORE police interaction than Whites.

 

Therefore ON AVERAGE a Black person has a FAR BETTER chance at surviving said interactions. The media knows, that for some reason Blacks get very emotional over certain topics, and WILL riot/protest (not all, obviously, but as you can see quite a lot, ie Baltimore, Ferguson, etc.), and the media loves drama <deleted> - shows like that, plus blood&violence always sells well. Therefore they twist the facts and statistics, to form a narrative which (in this day and age, and climate of anti-"racism", PC, etc.) will cause unrest, and thus boosts their viewer/reader numbers. They pretend like there is an outrageous amount of "racist" police brutality&"murder" incidents against Blacks, which couldn't be further from the truth.

 

Apart from ie George Floyd, the vast majority of these killings (Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Mike Brown, etc.) were JUSTIFIED killings, but it didn't help that the media spun a bunch of lies (such as "he had his hands up").

 

 

So again: They are protesting an issue, that simply isn't there. Or at the very least, not even remotely as bad, as it is portrayed to be. And where is all the outrage over all these killed White people? Why is nobody there twisting the facts, to paint the police a certain way? Simple: It can't be portrayed as racism (even if the officer doing the shooting was Black), due to the shoddy "definition" of racism many people use (incl. much of the media), it won't stirr up as much unrest and violence, etc.

 

And why is it, that the numbers tell a completely different story from the media narrative? Also simple: Uncomfortable truths, statistics and numbers are also "racist", these days.

[RuamRudy]

11 minutes ago, FarangULong said:

They are condemning something that does not exist in the US, nor in the UK, etc. They're using it as an excuse to loot, riot, and as a launchpad to attack other things, they deem "racist", "intolerable", etc. Such as a great opportunity, to attack, dismantle, deface and throw into the river statues of controversial figures.

 

Here are some facts for you, some of which I have posted previously, which you (and others, incl. BLM & the media) conveniently ignore or dismiss, as they do not suit your narrative:

 

Last year in the US TWICE as many unarmed White people were shot dead by police, than unarmed Black people.

Also many more armed Whites.

 

I know, that your next "argument" will be, that there are far more Whites than Blacks, which is true, but it only serves to show how much bs media & blm are peddling, when you know (and are capably of understanding these numbers/statistics) that:

 

Blacks are 13% (not 15%, as I previously estimated) of the total US population. Approx. half of those are males. And of these males, the vast majority of crimes are being committed by the 16-35 (maybe to 40) age group. So that's AT MOST 5% of the total population.

 

These AT MOST 5% commit more than 50% of ALL violent crimes (murder, manslaughter, attempted murder, GBH, [armed] robberies, etc.), and commit approx. 52% of all murders. Murdered/killed Blacks are the victims of other Black men in over 80% of cases. A White person is EIGHT TIMES more likely to be assaulted by Black person, than vice versa. A White person is TWELVE TIMES more likely to be robbed by Black person, than vice versa.

 

Where is the outrage over all of this? Is it only "racism" if the "offender" (or cop) is White, and the victim (or "victim" in many of these police shootings) is Black? Is it only a problem, if the person on the receiving end is Black?

 

Since neighbourhoods with a lot of crime (esp. violent crime) have a larger police presence, and more pro-active policing, Blacks have FAR MORE police interaction than Whites.

 

Therefore ON AVERAGE a Black person has a FAR BETTER chance at surviving said interactions. The media knows, that for some reason Blacks get very emotional over certain topics, and WILL riot/protest (not all, obviously, but as you can see quite a lot, ie Baltimore, Ferguson, etc.), and the media loves drama <deleted> - shows like that, plus blood&violence always sells well. Therefore they twist the facts and statistics, to form a narrative which (in this day and age, and climate of anti-"racism", PC, etc.) will cause unrest, and thus boosts their viewer/reader numbers. They pretend like there is an outrageous amount of "racist" police brutality&"murder" incidents against Blacks, which couldn't be further from the truth.

 

Apart from ie George Floyd, the vast majority of these killings (Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Mike Brown, etc.) were JUSTIFIED killings, but it didn't help that the media spun a bunch of lies (such as "he had his hands up").

 

 

So again: They are protesting an issue, that simply isn't there. Or at the very least, not even remotely as bad, as it is portrayed to be. And where is all the outrage over all these killed White people? Why is nobody there twisting the facts, to paint the police a certain way? Simple: It can't be portrayed as racism (even if the officer doing the shooting was Black), due to the shoddy "definition" of racism many people use (incl. much of the media), it won't stirr up as much unrest and violence, etc.

 

And why is it, that the numbers tell a completely different story from the media narrative? Also simple: Uncomfortable truths, statistics and numbers are also "racist", these days.

I have no idea whether your numbers are correct, but lets say that they are (while I have no reason to dispute them, most people would cite credible references when they make such points) - does that in itself not concern you?

 

I can think of two possible explanations as to why black people commit a massively disproportionate amount of violent crime - either they are genetically predisposed to it (and, for the record, I do not believe that at all) or there are societal factors which play a major role in this. 

[Krataiboy]

7 hours ago, simple1 said:

Met Police, PM and so on have named the far right for targeting BLM  and police with violence, as well as chanting racist comments.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/14/met-police-condemns-mindless-hooliganism-far-right-protesters-london

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/13/black-lives-matter-protests-london-statues-racism-churchill/

 

There are various definitions for today's far right, some info below. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics

Stop swallowing the establishment propaganda. You'll get indigestion. 

[Rookiescot]

6 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Stop swallowing the establishment propaganda. You'll get indigestion. 

I dont think we are swallowing establishment propaganda. 

 

We watched the racist right wing thugs live on television.

[evadgib]

1 hour ago, CorpusChristie said:

Yes, but I was asking you whether you felt that it was justified , whether you feel that not giving your password to the police makes that person a terrorist .

Adams and McGuinness held proper convictions for terrorism yet still got to B&B at the White House, attend Parliament as guests of Catweasel while it was sitting (think 'Guy Fawkes'& remember Airey Neave) & the latter even managed to be presented to the Queen...????

Edited June 16, 2020 by evadgib

[Kadilo]

12 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Stop swallowing the establishment propaganda. You'll get indigestion. 

Establishment propaganda = anything that doesn’t fit my agenda. 

[Kadilo]

9 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

I dont think we are swallowing establishment propaganda. 

 

We watched the racist right wing thugs live on television.

Telegraph.........establishment propaganda ????

 

No it was an illusion, it didn’t really happen, you need you’re eyes tested. 
This COVID can make you see all sorts, ask Dom. 

[simple1]

34 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Stop swallowing the establishment propaganda. You'll get indigestion. 

How very informative, not. Got links to the credible sources you access

Edited June 16, 2020 by simple1

[Loiner]

2 hours ago, simple1 said:

The guy was found guilty for action contrary to Section 7 of the Terrorism Act. Got a problem, someone might be interested, but not me, so kindly cease your harassment on this matter.

Harassment? That's what the police were doing to somebody for politically motivated reasons. They tend to do it on many levels, such as targeting anti-government leaders, or even taking a biased position at rallies and protests. Guess what, they harass 'the right' while supporting 'the left'.   
 

[Nigel Garvie]

2 hours ago, FarangULong said:

They are condemning something that does not exist in the US, nor in the UK, etc. They're using it as an excuse to loot, riot, and as a launchpad to attack other things, they deem "racist", "intolerable", etc. Such as a great opportunity, to attack, dismantle, deface and throw into the river statues of controversial figures.

 

Here are some facts for you, some of which I have posted previously, which you (and others, incl. BLM & the media) conveniently ignore or dismiss, as they do not suit your narrative:

 

Last year in the US TWICE as many unarmed White people were shot dead by police, than unarmed Black people.

Also many more armed Whites.

 

I know, that your next "argument" will be, that there are far more Whites than Blacks, which is true, but it only serves to show how much bs media & blm are peddling, when you know (and are capably of understanding these numbers/statistics) that:

 

Blacks are 13% (not 15%, as I previously estimated) of the total US population. Approx. half of those are males. And of these males, the vast majority of crimes are being committed by the 16-35 (maybe to 40) age group. So that's AT MOST 5% of the total population.

 

These AT MOST 5% commit more than 50% of ALL violent crimes (murder, manslaughter, attempted murder, GBH, [armed] robberies, etc.), and commit approx. 52% of all murders. Murdered/killed Blacks are the victims of other Black men in over 80% of cases. A White person is EIGHT TIMES more likely to be assaulted by Black person, than vice versa. A White person is TWELVE TIMES more likely to be robbed by Black person, than vice versa.

 

Where is the outrage over all of this? Is it only "racism" if the "offender" (or cop) is White, and the victim (or "victim" in many of these police shootings) is Black? Is it only a problem, if the person on the receiving end is Black?

 

Since neighbourhoods with a lot of crime (esp. violent crime) have a larger police presence, and more pro-active policing, Blacks have FAR MORE police interaction than Whites.

 

Therefore ON AVERAGE a Black person has a FAR BETTER chance at surviving said interactions. The media knows, that for some reason Blacks get very emotional over certain topics, and WILL riot/protest (not all, obviously, but as you can see quite a lot, ie Baltimore, Ferguson, etc.), and the media loves drama <deleted> - shows like that, plus blood&violence always sells well. Therefore they twist the facts and statistics, to form a narrative which (in this day and age, and climate of anti-"racism", PC, etc.) will cause unrest, and thus boosts their viewer/reader numbers. They pretend like there is an outrageous amount of "racist" police brutality&"murder" incidents against Blacks, which couldn't be further from the truth.

 

Apart from ie George Floyd, the vast majority of these killings (Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Mike Brown, etc.) were JUSTIFIED killings, but it didn't help that the media spun a bunch of lies (such as "he had his hands up").

 

 

So again: They are protesting an issue, that simply isn't there. Or at the very least, not even remotely as bad, as it is portrayed to be. And where is all the outrage over all these killed White people? Why is nobody there twisting the facts, to paint the police a certain way? Simple: It can't be portrayed as racism (even if the officer doing the shooting was Black), due to the shoddy "definition" of racism many people use (incl. much of the media), it won't stirr up as much unrest and violence, etc.

 

And why is it, that the numbers tell a completely different story from the media narrative? Also simple: Uncomfortable truths, statistics and numbers are also "racist", these days.

It's a discussion forum, but, for everyone's benefit, don't force us to wade through paragraph after paragraph saying the same thing, it's exhausting. This is exacerbated by the fact that when this was written you appear to have been suffering from a severe case of reality dislocation syndrome.

This is a clear example "They are condemning something that does not exist in the US, nor in the UK, etc". 

So twice as many (67%) white people were shot by police as black people (33%), and you said black people are 13% of the population. So nearly 3 times as many black people per head of population are killed by police as white people - go figure.

 

Brief reply only please, if any.