1 hour ago, transam said:

When I was a kid in London, every winter the smog came down with a vengeance, people had to walk in front of my school bus showing the driver where the curb was and if a parked car was in the way.

 

Is it the same 60 years on, no, why....?

 

The same will happen in the future, fossil fuels will be depleted, and the next step in nuclear power will be here....

 

Teenagers today prefer real evidence, not stories from retired men on  anonymous forums, that speculate on what the future will be for them. Its now part of GSCE school curriculum. 

6 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

Teenagers today prefer real evidence, not stories from retired men on  anonymous forums, that speculate on what the future will be for them. Its now part of GSCE school curriculum. 

And yet nearly all our countries are run by old men that should have retired years ago. 

 

Does anyone really care what teenagers want? 

Edited January 22, 20233 yr by BritManToo

1 minute ago, BritManToo said:

And yet nearly all our countries are run by old men that should have retired years ago. 

UK no, France, no, Italy no, Netherlands no, US yes, Canada no, new Zealand no. 

Not sure about many others, but 'nearly all's doesn't seem correct.

10 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

And yet nearly all our countries are run by old men that should have retired years ago. 

 

Does anyone really care what teenagers want? 

Considering this is about Greta challenging all those old men and the scientists acknowledging her work has helped yes. Does it help her online haters or trolls as I linked to? She does not care about them. 

17 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Considering this is about Greta challenging all those old men and the scientists acknowledging her work has helped yes. Does it help her online haters or trolls as I linked to? She does not care about them. 

As you keep going on about "old men" in a derogatory way , how old were the scientists and what are their gender ?

   I do hope they weren't "old men" as well 

Just now, Mac Mickmanus said:

As you keep going on about "old men" in a derogatory way , how old were the scientists and what are their gender ?

   I do hope they weren't "old men" as well 

The overwhelming majority of climate change deniers are old white men. Teenagers who drink the kool aid are vanishingly rare. Those who hate Thunberg or all old white men. Climate change denial is a right wing phenomenon and is mainly found in countries which have large fossil fuel industries or Murdoch controlled press. It's especially rampant in countries with both.

14 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

As you keep going on about "old men" in a derogatory way , how old were the scientists and what are their gender ?

   I do hope they weren't "old men" as well 

I responded to a post in kind, once. Get your facts correct, the poster below is the one who used the term first perhaps have a word with him. Link to where I have used it before?

 

46 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

And yet nearly all our countries are run by old men that should have retired years ago. 

 

Does anyone really care what teenagers want? 

 

Edited January 22, 20233 yr by Bkk Brian

44 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

And yet nearly all our countries are run by old men that should have retired years ago. 

 

Does anyone really care what teenagers want? 

Why would you think that old white men running the country don't care what teenagers want?

51 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Does anyone really care what teenagers want? 

I do. 

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

It's not an opinion.

 

It is a fact she was exercising her democratic right to peaceful protest

Are you then meaning that the German police detained her wrongfully? Because it is a fact that they took her away, right? Think it is the first photo in this thread.

So, if it is a fact she was exercising her democratic right to peaceful protest, why was she taken away?

Still reads like your opinion.

5 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Are you then meaning that the German police detained her wrongfully? Because it is a fact that they took her away, right? Think it is the first photo in this thread.

So, if it is a fact she was exercising her democratic right to peaceful protest, why was she taken away?

Still reads like your opinion.

I have made no comment on the police actions.
 

Please explain in detail why you are making comments not connected to my post?

 

Why have you chosen to comment on something not linked to my point? 
 

My point being you are advocating tyrannical punishments for the fact those involved in this protest were exercising their democratic right to peaceful protest. 
 

No deflections please. 

Edited January 22, 20233 yr by Bluespunk

4 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Are you then meaning that the German police detained her wrongfully? Because it is a fact that they took her away, right? Think it is the first photo in this thread.

So, if it is a fact she was exercising her democratic right to peaceful protest, why was she taken away?

Still reads like your opinion.

It depends how you define wrongfully. Are you suggesting that all laws are righteous?

19 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Why would you think that old white men running the country don't care what teenagers want?

It really is inappropriate these days to target a group of people based on their age , gender  and race .

   It is racist , sexist and ageist and that isn't acceptable these days .

   Change your target group  to a different race, age and gender and see how it sounds 

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

It depends how you define wrongfully. Are you suggesting that all laws are righteous?

Nah, it do not depend on anything like that. You can not bend the word wrongfully as you please. If you have laws in a country, then it´s wrong to break them that is the pure meaning of the word.

4 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Nah, it do not depend on anything like that. You can not bend the word wrongfully as you please. If you have laws in a country, then it´s wrong to break them that is the pure meaning of the word.

Not wishing to get off topic but it used to be illegal for whites to marry blacks in the US and in Australia. And for gays to have sex. Some laws need to be broken more before they can get fixed and laws against protesting are particularly egregious. The argument that Thunberg was breaking the law and therefore in the wrong is a joke. The majority of German citizens would think likewise I suggest.

Edited January 22, 20233 yr by ozimoron

Just now, ozimoron said:

Not wishing to get off topic but it used to be illegal for whites to marry blacks in the US and in Australia. And for gays to have sex. Some laws need to be broken more before they can get fixed and laws against protesting are particularly egregious.

Your opinion. I have a different opinion.

12 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Are you then meaning that the German police detained her wrongfully? Because it is a fact that they took her away, right? Think it is the first photo in this thread.

So, if it is a fact she was exercising her democratic right to peaceful protest, why was she taken away?

Still reads like your opinion.

Why not accept what the police already said?

 

"The local Aachen police force said Ms Thunberg was part of a group of protesters that "stormed" towards the edge of the open-cast mine, described by officers as "steep and extremely dangerous".

The force said the activist was not arrested but was instead carried along with other protesters for identification.

She was released after a brief detention, police confirmed."

 

Link previously provided

7 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I have made no comment on the police actions.
 

Please explain in detail why you are making comments not connected to my post?

 

Why have you chosen to comment on something not linked to my point? 
 

My point being you are advocating tyrannical punishments for the fact those involved in this protest were exercising their democratic right to peaceful protest. 
 

No deflections please. 

You are making a comment on police actions, at the same time you are posting that she was exercising her democratic rights to peaceful protest. Because if it was a peaceful protest, means it was not breaking any laws. Something that also would not result in her being detained. So, if you think, everything was linked to your post. What your point is, I have no clue about as I have no abilities as a shrink.

The fact is that she was removed and detained. That must then mean that she was doing something that was not her right do to or was not peaceful enough according to the laws and rules in the country she was protesting in.

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Why not accept what the police already said?

 

"The local Aachen police force said Ms Thunberg was part of a group of protesters that "stormed" towards the edge of the open-cast mine, described by officers as "steep and extremely dangerous".

The force said the activist was not arrested but was instead carried along with other protesters for identification.

She was released after a brief detention, police confirmed."

 

Link previously provided

Yes, mean it was not peaceful enough, as well as they endangered their own and life of others. That´s not exercising a democratic right to peaceful protest.

7 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

You are making a comment on police actions, at the same time you are posting that she was exercising her democratic rights to peaceful protest. Because if it was a peaceful protest, means it was not breaking any laws. Something that also would not result in her being detained. So, if you think, everything was linked to your post. What your point is, I have no clue about as I have no abilities as a shrink.

The fact is that she was removed and detained. That must then mean that she was doing something that was not her right do to or was not peaceful enough according to the laws and rules in the country she was protesting in.

I made no comment on police actions. 
 

Just your post advocating tyrannical punishment for the exercising of a democratic right to peaceful protest. 
 

I also don’t which laws you are referring to when you say they were broken.
 

The OP does not mention any broken laws. 

 

In fact it makes clear she was not arrested. 

 

From the OP

“Police clarified that Ms Thunberg had not been arrested, and later said she had been released after an ID check.”

Edited January 22, 20233 yr by Bluespunk
Quote added

7 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Yes, mean it was not peaceful enough, as well as they endangered their own and life of others. That´s not exercising a democratic right to peaceful protest.

Yes mean? I mean nothing. I qave a direct quote. It does not say the demonstration was not peaceful. 

 

Don't put words in my mouth or try to create strawman

Edited January 22, 20233 yr by Bkk Brian

20 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

It really is inappropriate these days to target a group of people based on their age , gender  and race .

   It is racist , sexist and ageist and that isn't acceptable these days .

   Change your target group  to a different race, age and gender and see how it sounds 

If it was any one group of people based on their age or gender, or race or any combination thereof who were running the world it would sound pretty unjust and rightly so. So it sounds pretty bad to say that old men are running the world. 

Edited January 22, 20233 yr by placeholder

7 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I made no comment on police actions. 
 

Just your post advocating tyrannical punishment for the exercising of a democratic right to peaceful protest. 
 

I also don’t which laws you are referring to when you say they were broken.
 

The OP does not mention any broken laws. 

 

In fact it makes clear she was not arrested. 

 

From the OP

“Police clarified that Ms Thunberg had not been arrested, and later said she had been released after an ID check.”

You better look up the difference between removed and detained vs arrested? After that we can do further discussion.
 

5 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I mean? I mean nothing. I qave a direct quote. It does not say the demonstration was not peaceful. 

 

Don't put words in my mouth or try to create strawman

Ok, so you mean nothing with your posts. I can clearly see that further discussion here will not bear any fruit.

But, if had been thinking before posting your quote, you would have understood that I used the word "mean" in relation to the quote.

Then that must mean I did not put any words in your mouth, right?

----------------------------------------------

But, I am deeply sorry I have to break it to you guys. You know, sometimes things are just black or white. That´s when the the grey has been removed. That means, that there are no people being removed nor detained in a peaceful protest. That´s a BIG fact! Sometimes, it´s just that easy!

1 minute ago, Gottfrid said:

You better look up the difference between removed and detained vs arrested? After that we can do further discussion.
 

Ok, so you mean nothing with your posts. I can clearly see that further discussion here will not bear any fruit.

But, if had been thinking before posting your quote, you would have understood that I used the word "mean" in relation to the quote.

Then that must mean I did not put any words in your mouth, right?

----------------------------------------------

But, I am deeply sorry I have to break it to you guys. You know, sometimes things are just black or white. That´s when the the grey has been removed. That means, that there are no people being removed nor detained in a peaceful protest. That´s a BIG fact! Sometimes, it´s just that easy!

Sometimes its even easier. Don't take a police quote and add your own meaning to it when the meaning was already clear. 

7 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

You better look up the difference between removed and detained vs arrested? After that we can do further discussion.
 

Ok, so you mean nothing with your posts. I can clearly see that further discussion here will not bear any fruit.

But, if had been thinking before posting your quote, you would have understood that I used the word "mean" in relation to the quote.

Then that must mean I did not put any words in your mouth, right?

----------------------------------------------

But, I am deeply sorry I have to break it to you guys. You know, sometimes things are just black or white. That´s when the the grey has been removed. That means, that there are no people being removed nor detained in a peaceful protest. That´s a BIG fact! Sometimes, it´s just that easy!

It is a fact she was not arrested. 
 

I have made no comment on police actions. 
 

You have advocated tyrannical punishment for people exercising their democratic rights to peaceful protest. 
 

That is the point I have been making. 

Edited January 22, 20233 yr by Bluespunk

2 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

It is a fact it was a peaceful protest. 
 

You have advocated tyrannical punishment for people exercising their democratic rights to peaceful protest. 
 

That is the point I have been making. 

Yes, and you have repeated that 3-5 times uncontested. I am just saying that is your opinion.

My opinion is that no one gets removed or detained during a peaceful protest.

Edited January 22, 20233 yr by Gottfrid

Just now, Gottfrid said:

Yes, and you have repeated that 3-5 times uncontested. I am just saying that is your opinion.

Nope. 
 

It is a fact. 

2 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Yes, and you have repeated that 3-5 times uncontested. I am just saying that is your opinion.

The mining compony owns the land and the protestors were illegally trespassing on the land and the protestors/squatters were illegally occupying the land/buildings and the Police had every legal right to remove them 

4 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Nope. 
 

It is a fact. 

No, it´s an opinion based on your standards, moral aspects, emotions and way of thinking. Others may have another way of looking at it. You are not the one who gets to decide what is a fact or not. Therefore, it´s your opinion, and if it is a fact according to you, then that will also stand for you and therefore be your opinion.

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

The mining compony owns the land and the protestors were illegally trespassing on the land and the protestors/squatters were illegally occupying the land/buildings and the Police had every legal right to remove them 

Yes, and they are just using another version in the press to not get into difficult position.