The verminous Football Lads Alliance

[Jim Smith 2,314]

2 minutes ago, Bill said:

What a load of nonsense - aimed at peddling the same myth.

Those attacked were not innocent bystanders but those who had deliberately gone into the other group's areas looking for trouble.

The huge protests around the country were trouble free -except when the far right turned up to cause trouble.

And however  much offence is caused by only two acts of spray painting there is NO justification for shoving lines of coke up your nose and getting drunk so as to intimidate and attack others

However, as said before - the real question is why you persist in this misrepresentation. What is your motive ?

What misreprestention are you talking about?

You are the one revelling in people being assaulted for going into the "other group's" area whatever that means? A couple of these attacks happened outside one of our biggest rail stations. I assume you personally know those carrying out the attacks and the victims and what provoked them?

Agree entirely there is no justification for getting attacking others drug fuelled or otherwise. That's my point. You are condoning attacks on others by one faction. I am saying its not acceptable full stop.

 

[Bill 1,788]

2 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

What misreprestention are you talking about?

You are the one revelling in people being assaulted for going into the "other group's" area whatever that means? A couple of these attacks happened outside one of our biggest rail stations. I assume you personally know those carrying out the attacks and the victims and what provoked them?

Agree entirely there is no justification for getting attacking others drug fuelled or otherwise. That's my point. You are condoning attacks on others by one faction. I am saying its not acceptable full stop.

The police has designated two areas for protesters

Pointing out who was responsible is not 'revelling' in anything, so stop using emotive words.

The police had also designated two stations for leaving the area.

Victoria for the rightwing and Charing Cross/Waterloo for the BLM

If you choose to use the 'wrong' station then you have a reason other than travelling - as with Trafalgar Square.

[ncfcstar 287]

I'm sure there were a minority of people who turned up at the weekend genuinely looking to 'protect' statues and make a point - although why they felt that was necessary when the BLM march was postponed/moved I'm not too sure.  I would also hope that once it became obvious that this was just an excuse for a big p*** up/coke fest the genuine protestors went home.

The pictures from the weekend, where far less people turned up in comparison to the BLM marches across the country, tell you all you need to know about the majority of people that turned up.  They don't really care about the statues, they may believe they care about our country, but it's based on nationalistic views which in turn start to lead people down a very shady garden path.  There were streams of urine, cans of lager everywhere and people running up behind the police and kicking them, or punching them and running away to let their 'mates' take a few hits of a baton.

The guy urinating next to the police memorial sums up Saturday's 'protests', I'm sure he had no idea what he was doing, but when you pitch your protest in the context of 'protecting statues' to then be so oblivious to your surroundings is pathetic.

Canarywary's post sums things up well.

[BigFish 1,986]

32 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I think 75% is a ludicrous suggestion to be honest. There were plenty of people there who were genuinely looking to protect statues or just make a point without violence. ... the actual number of violent flash points was probably relatively small due to the police keeping a tight grip on things. I'm not defending idiots attacking the police or rampaging through Hyde Park intimidating people having picnics or saying that the "causes" equate.

I think you are

[Mr Angry 1,545]

They weren't doing N A Z I salutes-they were trying to attract the attention of Crystal Palace goalkeeper Wayne Hennessey who was taking a picture of them.

(Disclaimer-I don't actually believe that Hennessey was there).

[Jim Smith 2,314]

7 minutes ago, BigFish said:

I think you are

No, no I'm not. 

 

 

 

[Bill 1,788]

One of the notable differences between the two sides was that there were no placards, or even flags with the right wing. Not a coincidence as I am sure those behind these knew that the numpties would turn up with all manner of embarrassing stuff.

There was no focus to the rightwing protest No area for speeches. There seemed no common cause beyond what looked to be a 1920's lynching mentality.

That left thousands of drunks to wander about with nothing to do other than cause trouble.

Look at the group attacking 4 people innocently having a picnic in Hype Park. Or those who 'invaded' Trafalgar Square - only to have to be driven back by strong arm methods from the police.

What were they doing there ? Wanting  a reasoned debate about racism or slavery ? Likewise those who had gone to Waterloo.

If I, or any City fan. chose to sit among the binners in their North Stand I doubt many would have much sympathy if I was attacked.

And it is a measure of the limited trouble at Waterloo or none at Victoria that both sides choose to heed the advice of the police.

So let's have no more of this plague on both sides - that is a total misrepresentation.

One side had and still does have a worthy cause, despite any vandalism and trouble caused in that name. The other represents so much that is wrong in society.

This is Trafalgar Square. What were the rightwing doing there ? Why had they brought fireworks - as seen elsewhere ?

unless this myth of trying to lay the blame on both sides is not challenged we will simply go down the road of the 'stabbed in the back' lie peddled in post WW1 Germany

 

 

[Jim Smith 2,314]

38 minutes ago, Bill said:

The police has designated two areas for protesters

Pointing out who was responsible is not 'revelling' in anything, so stop using emotive words.

The police had also designated two stations for leaving the area.

Victoria for the rightwing and Charing Cross/Waterloo for the BLM

If you choose to use the 'wrong' station then you have a reason other than travelling - as with Trafalgar Square.

Where was Waterloo designated as such? Your posts are the first mention that this that I've ever seen certainly. How do people who have to get trains from Waterloo get home then?

Your reply is akin to saying that any away fans who walk round the back of the Barclay deserve a good hiding. 

The fights/attacks outside Waterloo in particular (where its not actually been confirmed that the people beaten up were "right wing" as far as I can tell) were vicious and I don't understand why you appear to regard that sort of behaviour as acceptable or indeed something to revel in?

The behaviour by the "counter protestors" (or "football lads" or "right wing" or whatever you might call them) who attacked police, hurled bottles and committed criminal acts was completely unacceptable as was the same behaviour the previous weekend by those who engaged in it. 

[Jim Smith 2,314]

Just now, Jim Smith said:

Where was Waterloo designated as such? Your posts are the first mention that this that I've ever seen certainly. How do people who have to get trains from Waterloo get home then?

Your reply is akin to saying that any away fans who walk round the back of the Barclay deserve a good hiding. 

The fights/attacks outside Waterloo in particular (where its not actually been confirmed that the people beaten up were "right wing" as far as I can tell) were vicious and I don't understand why you appear to regard that sort of behaviour as acceptable or indeed something to revel in?

The behaviour by the "counter protestors" (or "football lads" or "right wing" or whatever you might call them) who attacked police, hurled bottles and committed criminal acts was completely unacceptable as was the same behaviour the previous weekend by those who engaged in it. 

I exclude from my condemnation of behaviour around waterloo the group of BLM protestors who actually saved a man being beaten and carried him away from the scene. That is the sort of behaviour we should be praising.

[Pugin 601]

Just now, Jim Smith said:

 

The behaviour by the "counter protestors" (or "football lads" or "right wing" or whatever you might call them) who attacked police, hurled bottles and committed criminal acts was completely unacceptable as was the same behaviour the previous weekend by those who engaged in it. 

Professor Matthew Feldman is the Director of the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right. He was on the Emma Barnett show on Five Live this morning. 

He explains where the DFLA has come from - as a successor to the English Defence League and the original FLA (formed by a Spurs anti-Muslim hooligan group). He explains the role of Paul Golding, a convicted terrorist.

Can I suggest you listen to it on BBC Sounds, and then let us know your thoughts. Honestly, information is no bad thing and you may wish to think again. Why decent, non-violent, respectable people would attend yesterday's event is the big question. If there were any there, maybe they just got sucked into it. I doubt they numbered as much as 25% of the gathering.

www.bbc.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_five_live

[hogesar 9,616]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

Great post.

It certainly seemed the 'protestors' who showed up this weekend wanted a fight and when they didn't get one with BLM they had one with the police. 

The BLM protest also didn't have the stench of unrelenting hypocrisy running through them. People who claim to be so concerned about protecting a statue of Churchill (a man who led this country to victory of fascists) throwing fascist salutes doesn't make any sense. Similarly the picture of the lads in front of the cenotaph with their banners saying they're not far right- despite one of their numbers wearing a ****ing **** stormtrooper helmet.

 

100% agree with the bit in bold. It was clear that the majority weren't interested in anything but a fight. At least with the BLM protests the violence was a huge minority.

However in terms of hypocrisy (you are of course right about the complete pr*cks **** saluting etc) the only thing I struggle with is watching a load of young people wearing the latest Nike trainers and Adidas tracksuits jump all over a statue because of it's relativity to slavery is a bit....yeah.

[Bill 1,788]

13 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Where was Waterloo designated as such? Your posts are the first mention that this that I've ever seen certainly. How do people who have to get trains from Waterloo get home then?

Your reply is akin to saying that any away fans who walk round the back of the Barclay deserve a good hiding. 

The fights/attacks outside Waterloo in particular (where its not actually been confirmed that the people beaten up were "right wing" as far as I can tell) were vicious and I don't understand why you appear to regard that sort of behaviour as acceptable or indeed something to revel in?

The behaviour by the "counter protestors" (or "football lads" or "right wing" or whatever you might call them) who attacked police, hurled bottles and committed criminal acts was completely unacceptable as was the same behaviour the previous weekend by those who engaged in it. 

More misrepresentation.

I am sure everyone else can distinguish between entering a volatile area knowing the reaction and walking round the back of the Barclay.

I have no said that action was acceptable - that is just you lying.

What happened the previous Saturday was not the same as what happened on this Saturday - so stop making up stuff

https://twitter.com/MetPoliceEvents/status/1271831258423857159

And anyone who knows London will be well aware that one stop from Victoria line is Vauxhall mainline, which every Waterloo train passes through - likewise the other underground lines provide for easy access to other mainline stations.

Those attacked were on the streets around Waterloo, not on the main concourse.

So next time, instead of twisting the evidence, try posting what is correct.... assuming that is your intent 🤔

 

[Jim Smith 2,314]

3 minutes ago, Pugin said:

Professor Matthew Feldman is the Director of the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right. He was on the Emma Barnett show on Five Live this morning. 

He explains where the DFLA has come from - as a successor to the English Defence League and the original FLA (formed by a Spurs anti-Muslim hooligan group). He explains the role of Paul Golding, a convicted terrorist.

Can I suggest you listen to it on BBC Sounds, and then let us know your thoughts. Honestly, information is no bad thing and you may wish to think again. Why decent, non-violent, respectable people would attend yesterday's event is the big question. If there were any there, maybe they just got sucked into it. I doubt they numbered as much as 25% of the gathering.

www.bbc.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_five_live

I know precisely who thee FLA are and who the sort of people that go to their events are. I know there were some scummy people amongst those who went to London on Saturday. I have never sought to argue otherwise.

My initial point on this was that the government allowed this situation to develop as it has through the complete vacuum of leadership we have seen which also (along with statements by other authority figures) put the police in an impossible situation policing both of the recent demos because they couldn't do anything. Johnson should have owned this from the start, done a speech, written to Trump, implemented reforms and then asked people not to risk their (and others) lives by attended mass protests. he didn't do that, in fact he said nothing. Meanwhile many in authority actually implicitly sanctioned or encouraged people to attend mass gatherings at a time when it is illegal and in my view put our police in an impossible situation as well with some of their public statements.

This resulted in the ridiculous sight of police being chased around Whitehall by small mobs of protesters last week (unable to defend themselves in the way they normally would have) and people being allowed to commit acts of criminal damage with impugnity. That having been allowed to happen and being hyped up in the media was always going to bring a reaction from the right wing (who didn't really need the excuse but have taken it) and those who would use such a situation to provoke further division or even just for a good old fashioned tear up. I don't condone or support those groups. I have made that clear. My point is that the rule of law should be upheld provided its being applied fairly.

However, there have also been large numbers of ex service personnel attending these "counter protests" on recent days and guarding statues, monuments to those who lost their lives in the war. They had thousands of volunteers to do this on Saturday. They were extremely upset at the images they saw the previously weekend and feared that the police would once again not be able to protect these monuments. These people attended and did not fight with police, throw bottles or act like thugs but the media never has much interest in that. They will rightly criticise those that did and no doubt despair at being lumped in with them (I know they do as I know some of them). However bad it looks on tv its always only a few hundred people kicking off (a point which has been made about last week as well).

My gripe with Bill here though is that whilst I am condemning anyone who has been violent at either protest he seems to regard mobs visciously attacking and beating people outside waterloo station as something to celebrate because the people had walked into the wrong area. 

[Bill 1,788]

yesss !!!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53051096

[Bill 1,788]

3 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I know precisely who thee FLA are and who the sort of people that go to their events are. I know there were some scummy people amongst those who went to London on Saturday. I have never sought to argue otherwise.

My initial point on this was that the government allowed this situation to develop as it has through the complete vacuum of leadership we have seen which also (along with statements by other authority figures) put the police in an impossible situation policing both of the recent demos because they couldn't do anything. Johnson should have owned this from the start, done a speech, written to Trump, implemented reforms and then asked people not to risk their (and others) lives by attended mass protests. he didn't do that, in fact he said nothing. Meanwhile many in authority actually implicitly sanctioned or encouraged people to attend mass gatherings at a time when it is illegal and in my view put our police in an impossible situation as well with some of their public statements.

This resulted in the ridiculous sight of police being chased around Whitehall by small mobs of protesters last week (unable to defend themselves in the way they normally would have) and people being allowed to commit acts of criminal damage with impugnity. That having been allowed to happen and being hyped up in the media was always going to bring a reaction from the right wing (who didn't really need the excuse but have taken it) and those who would use such a situation to provoke further division or even just for a good old fashioned tear up. I don't condone or support those groups. I have made that clear. My point is that the rule of law should be upheld provided its being applied fairly.

However, there have also been large numbers of ex service personnel attending these "counter protests" on recent days and guarding statues, monuments to those who lost their lives in the war. They had thousands of volunteers to do this on Saturday. They were extremely upset at the images they saw the previously weekend and feared that the police would once again not be able to protect these monuments. These people attended and did not fight with police, throw bottles or act like thugs but the media never has much interest in that. They will rightly criticise those that did and no doubt despair at being lumped in with them (I know they do as I know some of them). However bad it looks on tv its always only a few hundred people kicking off (a point which has been made about last week as well).

My gripe with Bill here though is that whilst I am condemning anyone who has been violent at either protest he seems to regard mobs visciously attacking and beating people outside waterloo station as something to celebrate because the people had walked into the wrong area. 

What a load of misleading right wing drivel

The police could not police.... because those protesting were black. being the inferred intent

You can't help yourself can you righty.... whoever you are 🤔

The same posting of lies so as to supposedly provoke - but I think others now have the measure of you - given the lie in your last sentence being directly aimed at me

It will be curious to see what youe defence is in regard to the police advice - more lying I expect

[Jim Smith 2,314]

11 minutes ago, Bill said:

More misrepresentation.

I am sure everyone else can distinguish between entering a volatile area knowing the reaction and walking round the back of the Barclay.

I have no said that action was acceptable - that is just you lying.

What happened the previous Saturday was not the same as what happened on this Saturday - so stop making up stuff

https://twitter.com/MetPoliceEvents/status/1271831258423857159

And anyone who knows London will be well aware that one stop from Victoria line is Vauxhall mainline, which every Waterloo train passes through - likewise the other underground lines provide for easy access to other mainline stations.

Those attacked were on the streets around Waterloo, not on the main concourse.

So next time, instead of twisting the evidence, try posting what is correct.... assuming that is your intent 🤔

 

So sorry a tweet put out at 4.45 asking those in Trafalgar Square (i.e. BLM protestors) to leave via Charing Cross (north of the river as you will know and patently not Waterloo) and those in Parliament Square to leave via Victoria amounts as a designation that Waterloo (mentioned in neither tweet) which sits between the two and can be accessed quite easily by bridges from both areas is "enemy territory" for "counter protestors" (or perhaps even middle aged casually dressed white men?) justifying them being set upon by a mob in the streets outside the station. And yet BLM protestors beating people up outside and filmed outside trying to storm the station and being held back by police is fine. Neither of us know if those attacked said or did anything to deserve a beating and yet you seem to suggest that they deserve what they got for being in that location.

And I am the one misrepresenting here? 

One of the reasons that groups like the FLA are able to divide and conquer and garner support from is because people get fed up with not being able to discuss these types of sensitive subject honestly.  The violence by the extreme elements in both groups is completely unacceptable. You can't say violence by one side is wrong but then its ok if done by the other faction (or more accurately in this case probably just gangs attaching themselves to it). BLM as a movement is to be commended for cancelling their main protest on the Saturday because god knows what would have happened had the overall numbers been bigger.

[Bill 1,788]

"My gripe with Bill here though is that whilst I am condemning anyone who has been violent at either protest he seems to regard mobs visciously attacking and beating people outside waterloo station as something to celebrate because the people had walked into the wrong area.  "

or

able to discuss these types of sensitive subject honestly. 

You are able to discuss this  as are anyone else so stop lying.

Your guff about advice is wrong. If so why were there not hordes of BLM at Victoria causing trouble.

My info comes from two reporters who were there.

It is clear that you have an intent to mislead, and a similar intent to misrepresent my words ie something to celebrate

Something you have conveniently not done with other replies.

If others cannot see what you are trying to do then that is up to them - but you don't fool me for one moment with your lies and misrepresentations.

 

 

 

[Indy 3,283]

2 hours ago, Bill said:

What a load of nonsense - aimed at peddling the same myth.

Those attacked were not innocent bystanders but those who had deliberately gone into the other group's areas looking for trouble.

The huge protests around the country were trouble free -except when the far right turned up to cause trouble.

And however  much offence is caused by only two acts of spray painting there is NO justification for shoving lines of coke up your nose and getting drunk so as to intimidate and attack others

However, as said before - the real question is why you persist in this misrepresentation. What is your motive ?

Spot on.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

32 minutes ago, Bill said:

"My gripe with Bill here though is that whilst I am condemning anyone who has been violent at either protest he seems to regard mobs visciously attacking and beating people outside waterloo station as something to celebrate because the people had walked into the wrong area.  "

or

able to discuss these types of sensitive subject honestly. 

You are able to discuss this  as are anyone else so stop lying.

Your guff about advice is wrong. If so why were there not hordes of BLM at Victoria causing trouble.

My info comes from two reporters who were there.

It is clear that you have an intent to mislead, and a similar intent to misrepresent my words ie something to celebrate

Something you have conveniently not done with other replies.

If others cannot see what you are trying to do then that is up to them - but you don't fool me for one moment with your lies and misrepresentations.

 

 

 

I'm not trying to so anything except condemn all violence or criminal damage by demonstrators/counter protestors, Antifa, FLA, National Front whoever.

If you don't feel able to do the same then so be it but its ironic that you appear to be trying to paint me as the bad guy here or that I have some kind of agenda. I genuinely don't. I support the BLM cause although I am against ANY mass gatherings or demos at present whatever the cause.

I'm not sure which "info" you mean (the incorrect info you posted about Waterloo or something else?) but there are plenty of videos of what went on there on twitter or youtube if you want to look for yourself. I won't put links on here as they are not very nice viewing. People actually getting seriously hurt.

I hope its the last violence we see this summer. 

[Bill 1,788]

12 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I'm not trying to so anything except condemn all violence or criminal damage by demonstrators/counter protestors, Antifa, FLA, National Front whoever.

If you don't feel able to do the same then so be it but its ironic that you appear to be trying to paint me as the bad guy here or that I have some kind of agenda. I genuinely don't. I support the BLM cause although I am against ANY mass gatherings or demos at present whatever the cause.

I'm not sure which "info" you mean (the incorrect info you posted about Waterloo or something else?) but there are plenty of videos of what went on there on twitter or youtube if you want to look for yourself. I won't put links on here as they are not very nice viewing. People actually getting seriously hurt.

I hope its the last violence we see this summer. 

All violence of Saturday is to be condoned - but there has to be a line drawn between those who went there with that intent and those who did not

And misrepresenting my words to claim that I celebrate any of that is merely in keeping with your earlier posts. Trying to back track now, does not remove those posts. And the content and intent is what others have replied and objected to.

There were rightwing chants around Waterloo, that is how those attacked were identified.

The right wingers moved off from Trafalgar Square and headed to Waterloo. What were they doing. Why were they in that part when police cordons had already determined where each protest was to be. What was the group of right wingers doing in Hyde Park, if not looking to cause trouble ? (below)

How many BLM were trying to get into Parliament Square/Whitehall ?

As said, I do not condone violence. But I won't sit by and watch you and others who were not there peddle misleading weasel words. Those righties at Waterloo had gone there looking for trouble, just as those attacked at Trafalgar Square had - believing, I suspect, that they outnumbered BLM who contained a large percentage of female voters.

What they found at Waterloo was a different story..

However if you wish to peddle the myth that it was innocent 'whiteys' set upon by savage hordes then do so - but don't expect it to go unchallenged

 

this is the true story. Gangs of drunken rightwing thugs trying to avoid the police cordon to cause trouble and attack anyone they perceived was not on their side. If one of the victims was a martial arts expert and dealt with a number of those causing trouble would you claim the latter were then unfairly and unjustly hurt ?

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

I hope its the last violence we see this summer. 

Open football grounds and universities and you might see a more peaceful summer.

People clamour for more liberty in this nation and yet they try and deny others the same thing. 

The FLA and EDL are just thugs who you can stereotype. Alf Garnett was their hero and their life revolves around them telling the world how great their version of Britain would be.

Until people in this country that the more freedoms that are achieved, the more the state has to protect them. SO these thugs should be receiving very long punishments.

And those protesting that Black Lives Matter should please come up with a solution. Its no good claiming something when you don't have the answer to solving it. Yes we want rid of it, and it isn't only the current generation that feels strongly about it. But we have tried for 45 years to legislate for racism and it still doesn't deter. So will all the clever clogs tell us what can be done.

[Bill 1,788]

Not such a shrinking violet I am happy to show clips from Saturday.

I would draw your attention to "m.50secs - the man in the red T shirt and the others had evaded police cordons  and were at Trafalgar Square to provoke/cause trouble, as his antics show.

What a previous poster has related is clips with no context - whether deliberate or not that is for you to decide.

But to claim innocence when you have spent a large part of the day seeking out trouble, as had the overwhelmimng majority of rightwingers done then it should not come as surprise when you find it.

You will notice that in the clips outside of Waterloo there were plenty of white people. They were not attacked because they were not shouting inflammatory stuff.

If you live by the sword.....

 

As to a solution then making people aware is part of that solution. Just because it has not produced instant results is no reason to stop. Huge progress has been made, though there is far more to do. But when you have a PM who talks about picanninies and water melon smiles, and who stated about Africa

“The continent may be a blot, but it is not a blot upon our conscience,” he wrote. “The problem is not that we were once in charge, but that we are not in charge any more.”

“The best fate for Africa would be if the old colonial powers, or their citizens, scrambled once again in her direction; on the understanding that this time they will not be asked to feel guilty.”

That struggle is going to be that much harder

[Terminally Yellow 2,448]

38 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

So will all the clever clogs tell us what can be done.

I have a suggestion.

Stop being racist. It's not difficult. Treat everyone you meet equally and fairly making no alteration for race, religion, colour, creed, sexual orientation etc.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

I have a suggestion.

Stop being racist. It's not difficult. Treat everyone you meet equally and fairly making no alteration for race, religion, colour, creed, sexual orientation etc.

Blimey I wish we had thought of that in the 60's

•  

[BigFish 1,986]

7 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

However, there have also been large numbers of ex service personnel attending these "counter protests" on recent days and guarding statues, monuments to those who lost their lives in the war. They had thousands of volunteers to do this on Saturday. They were extremely upset at the images they saw the previously weekend and feared that the police would once again not be able to protect these monuments. These people attended and did not fight with police, throw bottles or act like thugs but the media never has much interest in that. They will rightly criticise those that did and no doubt despair at being lumped in with them (I know they do as I know some of them). However bad it looks on tv its always only a few hundred people kicking off (a point which has been made about last week as well).

@Jim Smith just can't stop himself. More excuses for racist hooliganism. Being ex service is no excuse for being racist, and not mutually exclusive. Only someone with an axe to grind would think so. The idea that these hooligans could be "upset" by the lack of protection for statues that they probably had to use wikipedia to find out who it was beggers belief.

[Bill 1,788]

3 minutes ago, BigFish said:

@Jim Smith just can't stop himself. More excuses for racist hooliganism. Being ex service is no excuse for being racist, and not mutually exclusive. Only someone with an axe to grind would think so. The idea that these hooligans could be "upset" by the lack of protection for statues that they probably had to use wikipedia to find out who it was beggers belief.

It is this idiot's inability to stop himself from lying - who ever he claims to be, as

'I know they do as I know some of them'

it was something I picked up on way back. A lie or two mixed in with misrepresentation and twisted comment on what others have said

Not too difficult to spot when you know how

 

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

On 14/06/2020 at 16:19, BroadstairsR said:

Doker was feared by all, but was great in the 6th.He played in a jazz band in a nearby pub in his evenings believe.

He did.  ... practiced in the gym at lunchtime and after school, we played volleyball a bad jazz soundtrack. Never fell foul of GS   , and I was good at cricket so prob ones of his faves. Did see him get a bit feisty once or twice but nothing compared to Doker and others  whose  names will come to me. 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

While Jim is being berated I do have to add a post regarding statues.

A BLM protest was arranged for today in Truro. There was a rumour that the protest would approach the War Memorial that contains the names of 290 Truro residents who died in conflicts up to and including Afghanistan.  This rumour surfaced on Saturday.

Consequently around 20 ex Servicemen and Women turned up and surrounded the memorial.

The BLM protest marched to ward the Memorial and chanted. Nothing provocative apart from Black Lives Matter while those around the Memorial shouted back that History Matters.

Police kept the protesters from marching past the Memorial so that trouble could be avoided although some protesters threw fruit and burgers toward those in front of the Memorial.

By 5.30 the protesters moved off and that was it.

The most upset were NHS staff whose park and ride bus was held up by the protesters.

So it isn't all Antifa and FLA.

[Bill 1,788]

The war memorial guff has been put out to over excite the not too bright. One cretinous act in defacing the Cenotaph has led to widespread scare stories that war memorials are under threat from attack, and vandalism - they are not.

But that lie does provide a much needed distraction from the real thought that underpins BLM, and other grievances that have not been properly aired or discussed prior to this.

And, ironically, it is that lie that goes to the heart of this problem. A wish by certain folk to keep one side fighting the other so as to not recognise who their real enemy is.

Until then, be assured that those lying to you are not your friends.

[Terminally Yellow 2,448]

5 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

I have a suggestion.

Stop being racist. It's not difficult. Treat everyone you meet equally and fairly making no alteration for race, religion, colour, creed, sexual orientation etc.

Blimey I wish we had thought of that in the 60's

•  

There are a lot of things I wished you guys had realised back in the sixties. We wouldn't be in such a bloody mess now if so.