Oli Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Una, what is a right wing person as you see them, what's the suppression? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 (edited) You made a big error in your post, i made no mention of the 'far right', that is something that is completely different to what i am trying to get at. You may have had your head turned by the lefty thought police, as any mention of 'right wing' is propaganded into 'far right wing', by these cretins. If anything has been extreme, its the 'hard left' we have been under for years, we were promised after the abolition of the death penalty, that all murders would mean prison till the day the murderer dies. The truth is they have reneged spectacularly on this promise to the people, and now we have the disgusting outcome of an average 12 year joke of a 'life sentence'. Couple this with the deliberate destruction of the country through mass immigration, then i think its obvious who the extremists have been. Any reversal of their hideous betrayals would have to be extreme as a response. The answer to your question is, there are many millions of normal right wing people who are suppressed daily by those in positions of authority. fair point i stand corrected on the far right thing are you saying there are far more liberals than right wing thinkers and thats how they got all the high powered jobs and influence you say they have. surely labour would never be out of office if democratically elected time and time again by the liberals you speak of . i think most people tory liberal or labour are not in a hurry to return to hangings im not sure its about libralism more about civilization trying to move forward Edited June 9, 2013 by overandunder2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Una, what is a right wing person as you see them, what's the suppression? Someone who loves their country as they know it once was, someone who is conservative by nature,someone who tries their very best, someone who is hard on crime and who hates the apologists of crime, someone who is a good neighbour, someone who respects authority, someone who believes in graft, self reliance and enterprise, someone who hates multi culturalism, someone who hates people who get houses and money just for opening their legs, someone who is compassionate for the genuine needy, someone who has rational thought. The suppression comes from the wreckers who believe in the opposite of the above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oli Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 fair point i stand corrected on the far right thing are you saying there are far more liberals than right wing thinkers and thats how they got all the high powered jobs and influence. surely labour would never be out of office? Just jumping on your post as I'm lonely... I guess that's why I asked what right wing means, individual beliefs aren't binary, we dont all collectively agree on what left and right wing mean. Personally I would have thought this country is probably majority right wing albeit passively but then It depends on an individual's definition of right wing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Personally I would have thought this country is probably majority right wing albeit passively but then It depends on an individual's definition of right wing. I think you are probably right there, with another significant proportion as bloody champagne socialists, and then the liberals at the BBC, public sector and government. The passive right wing being just that, passive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oli Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 Someone who loves their country as they know it once was, someone who is conservative by nature,someone who tries their very best, someone who is hard on crime and who hates the apologists of crime, someone who is a good neighbour, someone who respects authority, someone who believes in graft, self reliance and enterprise, someone who hates multi culturalism, someone who hates people who get houses and money just for opening their legs, someone who is compassionate for the genuine needy, someone who has rational thought. The suppression comes from the wreckers who believe in the opposite of the above. All the above is middle ground around our way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 (edited) fair point i stand corrected on the far right thing are you saying there are far more liberals than right wing thinkers and thats how they got all the high powered jobs and influence you say they have. surely labour would never be out of office if democratically elected time and time again by the liberals you speak of . i think most people tory liberal or labour are not in a hurry to return to hangings im not sure its about libralism more about civilization trying to move forward i think that the structure of the ruling bodies of this country are liberals, i dont think you would get a job at the bbc for instance if you dident toe their liberal line, As for numbers, i think there are many more right wing thinkers, but they have not inveigled themselves into the upper echelons in the same way. The right wing is massive, but the liberal elite pull all the strings, and rubbishing the 'right' is very easy for them and its very easy to get into peoples minds. An example, if you disagree with gay marriage, you are not a normal person, you are labelled a bigot. Yet a lot of decent normal people do disagree,and they are certainly not bigots. Remember when brown called that old girl on the election trail ' just a bigoted woman'. She was no bigot. Edited June 9, 2013 by unapalomablanca Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 (edited) i think that the structure of the ruling bodies of this country are liberals, i dont think you would get a job at the bbc for instance if you dident toe their liberal line, As for numbers, i think there are many more right wing thinkers, but they have not invegeld themselves into the upper echelons in the same way. The right wing is massive, but the liberal elite pull all the strings, and rubbishing the 'right' is very easy for them and its very easy to get into peoples minds. An example, if you disagree with gay marriage, you are not a normal person, you are labelled a bigot. Yet a lot of decent normal people do disagree,and they are certainly not bigots. Remember when brown called that old girl on the election trail ' just a bigoted woman'. She was no bigot. ok thanks but i think the old boy network was more a tory thing as is most of the serious wealth and power. thanks for your point of view its been interesting but i will leave it there as the left right debate is another topic. Edited June 9, 2013 by overandunder2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 ok thanks but i think the old boy network was more a tory thing as is most of the serious wealth and power. thanks for your point of view its been interesting but i will leave it there as the left right debate is another topic. ok. Thanks, having a beer now, sod the politics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted June 9, 2013 Report Share Posted June 9, 2013 ok. Thanks, having a beer now, sod the politics spot on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Someone who loves their country as they know it once was, someone who is conservative by nature,someone who tries their very best, someone who is hard on crime... The suppression comes from the wreckers who believe in the opposite of the above. I may have missed it, but could you tell me what your thoughts are then on the people who set fire to the Islamic centre and school, should they be charged with attempted murder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 YES! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Next question, since the letters EDL were scrawled on the walls of the Islamic centre, should the EDL be shut down? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieh Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 I may have missed it, but could you tell me what your thoughts are then on the people who set fire to the Islamic centre and school, should they be charged with attempted murder? Have they caught anybody for it yet until they do how does anybody know what the intent was so NO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 The death penalty for treason remained on the statute books long after other reasons for the death penalty were removed years ago. You would assume there was a reason. Yet in 1998 Tony Blair removed it for no good reason and with no consultation, or discussion WHY? Events in Woolwich, the political killing of a soldier would have been clear cut treason in the past and would have carried the death penalty without doubt. No point in charging the killers with treason today, it virtually doesn't exist any more. Thanks Tony, you have done it yet again. The word idiot is not strong enough for you, but if I use anything stronger it will get banned. That man was such a ............... choose your own word. It was removed because we are a signatory to the Convention on Human Rights. How you can say 'without consultation' is beyond me as they fought an election with the Human Rights Act as part of their manifesto so it was hardly hidden from view. Capital Punishment wouldn't have prevented what happened at Woolwich and anyone who thinks that it would have done has probably been on the whacky tabaccy, quite frankly. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieh Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Next question, since the letters EDL were scrawled on the walls of the Islamic centre, should the EDL be shut down? No. We should have proper freedom of speech.I should be able to say exactly what I want to, if you are offended call me a name back I won't care.If I own a B+B or a shop or pub and I don't want your custom whether you are black, brown, gay, welsh or a Yorkshireman I should be able to say no thank you I don't want to serve you Geordie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 (edited) But you are looking at one isolated crime,we all know they are guilty,but they will suffer for a long time rather than becoming martyers,if you dish out the justice that you seem to so want then you will have to apply it across the board and that is when it becomes a certainty that a mistake will be made and an innocent human will die. Would you be prepared to execute someone for the state by shooting them?,after all a .22 to the back of the head will do the trick,but if you want to be certain i am sure you could ask for .223 I do agree with one of the posters that sentences should be served consecutively There are problems with that though. Does the court specify which order the sentences are to be served in? If someone gets sent down for two crimes and he gets two 10 year sentences to be served consecutively then what happens if they then subsequently appeal one of them and get the conviction quashed or the sentence reduced? Which crime have they actually served the time for? In the Woolwich case then it's pretty much irrelevant because neither of them will ever be released. J. Edited June 10, 2013 by JonathanL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 Have they caught anybody for it yet until they do how does anybody know what the intent was so NO Eerr, setting fire to a building with people inside is a pretty strong indication that attempted murder charges would be at least in someones consideration. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keg Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 ok thanks but i think the old boy network was more a tory thing as is most of the serious wealth and power. thanks for your point of view its been interesting but i will leave it there as the left right debate is another topic. Sadly not O&U2012. Look at Mandleson if you want a perfect example of the old boy network at work on the left. I do think Unapalomablanca is partly right. There is a silent majority that takes everything on board but we tend to vent down the pub or on forums like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keg Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 No. We should have proper freedom of speech.I should be able to say exactly what I want to, if you are offended call me a name back I won't care.If I own a B+B or a shop or pub and I don't want your custom whether you are black, brown, gay, welsh or a Yorkshireman I should be able to say no thank you I don't want to serve you Geordie Question for you Geordieh, if that was allowed to happen, what would have happened with say segregation in the south of the US? we need some protection in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted June 10, 2013 Report Share Posted June 10, 2013 I may have missed it, but could you tell me what your thoughts are then on the people who set fire to the Islamic centre and school, should they be charged with attempted murder? They should either be charged with attempted murder, or arson and attempted murder. Why would you need to ask me this? Please dont confuse me with someone who thinks that laws only apply to certain people, we have already seen the establishment let certain groups off with slaps on the wrists, for serious misdemeanours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted June 11, 2013 Report Share Posted June 11, 2013 (edited) No not at all una, I was just opening up the dialogue as I can see where you are coming from, however it was the instances where you used the word "hate" and in particular when it related to multi-culturalism and you answered my (unasked) question, thanks. **EDIT** Not in a bad way, sorry no syntax on computerscreens Edited June 11, 2013 by henry d Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted June 11, 2013 Report Share Posted June 11, 2013 Death penalty has no place in a modern, civilized society. Prisons should focus on rehabilitation first and foremost, bring the reoffending rates down vs this "hard on crime" rubbish rhetoric which fails to address reoffending rates (see Norway vs US ). Prisons serve society, reoffending rates should be priority not people's personal satisfaction About being "tough on crime" which seems to be a pointless , expensive exercise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted June 11, 2013 Report Share Posted June 11, 2013 (edited) Death penalty has no place in a modern, civilized society. Prisons should focus on rehabilitation first and foremost.... Now we're getting to the nub. Who says the primary duty of prison is to rehabilitate? That is one of those socio/political assumptions that has been forced into the collective conscience by constant repetition. Prison in fact serves several functions. It should protect those who obey the law from those who do not (particularly as the law-abiding have consented to entrust their protection to the State rather than undertake it themselves: If the State fails to provide that protection by releasing those who are commited to criminality it has broken a covenant). It should exercise a deterent affect on those who may be tempted to break the law; it should encourage the prisoner by loss of liberty to confront his crimes, and I firmly believe, it should punish. Justice can and should be retributive. There should be a price to pay for crime, not merely a symbolic process to be gone through. Clearly prisoners who will inevitably be released should be educated and contructively occupied during their incarceration, but if reducing recidivism is the primary objective there are far more decisive ways of doing it than turning prisons into social care centres. Criminals can't re-offend if they're locked up and they can't re-offend if they're dead. Edited June 11, 2013 by Gimlet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted June 11, 2013 Report Share Posted June 11, 2013 particularly as the law-abiding have consented to entrust their protection to the State... But as there is no actual written "covenant", can people opt out of the system if their needs were not met? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.