Jump to content

Packham.(big dangerous mistake ? )


ditchman
 Share

Recommended Posts

been watching Packhams latest upcoming on TV...........he is exploring  with an eco terrorist...that the time for verbal action is coming to an end ...and direct physical action is needed in the form of bombing pipelines etc.....

we will have to watch the programme to find out how deep it is going...........

This is very close to INSIGHTMENT ...and maybe put ideas into other nutters........almost similar to what Trump did for Capitol Hill............i wonder if there is a legal case here to take him down

 

any views ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ditchman said:

been watching Packhams latest upcoming on TV...........he is exploring  with an eco terrorist...that the time for verbal action is coming to an end ...and direct physical action is needed in the form of bombing pipelines etc.....

we will have to watch the programme to find out how deep it is going...........

This is very close to INSIGHTMENT ...and maybe put ideas into other nutters........almost similar to what Trump did for Capitol Hill............i wonder if there is a legal case here to take him down

 

any views ?

Says exactly the opposite in The Times extract I’ve just read? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, ditchman said:

been watching Packhams latest upcoming on TV...........he is exploring  with an eco terrorist...that the time for verbal action is coming to an end ...and direct physical action is needed in the form of bombing pipelines etc.....

we will have to watch the programme to find out how deep it is going...........

This is very close to INSIGHTMENT ...and maybe put ideas into other nutters........almost similar to what Trump did for Capitol Hill............i wonder if there is a legal case here to take him down

 

any views ?

 

I have complained about some of the content on his Instagram site where people post all sorts of abuse and threats - i complained to Instagram and RSPB 

Just now, jall25 said:

 

I have complained about some of the content on his Instagram site where people post all sorts of abuse and threats - i complained to Instagram and RSPB  and the BBC

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Scully said:

Says exactly the opposite in The Times extract I’ve just read? 

interesting !!!!!!................my post came from the man himeself...on a PTC advertising the up and coming documentory................and you say the Times has a totally different take on it...?

34 minutes ago, eggy74 said:

Setting out a blueprint for his disciples ?

you are right.............i red it as giving liecence to the nutters as you confirm :good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, once you start breaking the law because you don’t approve of the way things are done, then where do you stop? 
There are already instances of folk letting down tyres of metropolitan 4x4’s, and pouring milk over displays in some shops because they don’t agree with how some people live.
It’s a slippery slope when you start to interfere illegally in the lives of others because you don’t agree with what they do.
Not everyone agrees with the science; indeed not all scientists do, but once you interfere in someone’s freedom of choice to live the way they choose then you’re heading down the path of religion, where the voices of differing opinions are drowned out and not tolerated, dissenters are ridiculed and insulted, and if anarchy rules, then we’re back to the first point I raised…where does it stop? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scully said:

The thing is, once you start breaking the law because you don’t approve of the way things are done, then where do you stop? 
There are already instances of folk letting down tyres of metropolitan 4x4’s, and pouring milk over displays in some shops because they don’t agree with how some people live.
It’s a slippery slope when you start to interfere illegally in the lives of others because you don’t agree with what they do.
Not everyone agrees with the science; indeed not all scientists do, but once you interfere in someone’s freedom of choice to live the way they choose then you’re heading down the path of religion, where the voices of differing opinions are drowned out and not tolerated, dissenters are ridiculed and insulted, and if anarchy rules, then we’re back to the first point I raised…where does it stop? 

 

i understand that........but in the PTC...(piece to camera with eco terrorist)......he is not talking about letting tyres down or pouring milk over shop displays......he is exploring the possibility of activly BOMBING A PIPELINE and the repercussions he would suffer as a result of getting caught................

now this is only a clip of the forcoming programme.............but in my mind ...for all those misguided folk out there ...that is rubber stamping serious TERROISM.....and i cant understand why he hasnt been arrested for just those few moments /words

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ditchman said:

i understand that........but in the PTC...(piece to camera with eco terrorist)......he is not talking about letting tyres down or pouring milk over shop displays......he is exploring the possibility of activly BOMBING A PIPELINE and the repercussions he would suffer as a result of getting caught................

now this is only a clip of the forcoming programme.............but in my mind ...for all those misguided folk out there ...that is rubber stamping serious TERROISM.....and i cant understand why he hasnt been arrested for just those few moments /words


As far as I’m aware he hasn’t actually condoned or suggested anyone should blow up a pipeline, and he has stated that if he went to prison he would lose his voice. Saying that, I’m not aware he has condemned such acts either, but that isn’t against the law and neither is simply having a debate about such things. 
Admittedly he’s sailing close to the wind, and I genuinely wish he would cross that line, but he’s not daft. He’s a hypocrite, but not daft. 
I agree, any such act of actually blowing up a pipeline would be terrorism, but in my opinion so is vandalising a shop display and vandalising someone’s private property because they act in ways you disagree with or won’t abide by your wishes and/or beliefs. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scully said:


As far as I’m aware he hasn’t actually condoned or suggested anyone should blow up a pipeline, and he has stated that if he went to prison he would lose his voice. Saying that, I’m not aware he has condemned such acts either, but that isn’t against the law and neither is simply having a debate about such things. 
Admittedly he’s sailing close to the wind, and I genuinely wish he would cross that line, but he’s not daft. He’s a hypocrite, but not daft. 
I agree, any such act of actually blowing up a pipeline would be terrorism, but in my opinion so is vandalising a shop display and vandalising someone’s private property because they act in ways you disagree with or won’t abide by your wishes and/or beliefs. 

 

i shall keep an eye out when the programme is aired......its one programme with Packham in that i will watch.............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello, will anyone on PW be watching tonight 🤔, he advocates breaking the law but will he be on the front line 🤔

16 hours ago, ditchman said:

i shall keep an eye out when the programme is aired......its one programme with Packham in that i will watch.............

On tonight Simon 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scully said:

I would think that if he had advocated bombing pipelines then it would be all over the media, and it isn’t. 

It is , the wife saw it on tv this morning and a quick search came up with this.

https://duckduckgo.com/?hps=1&q=bbc+packham+pipeline&ia=web

Edited by sportsbob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Scully said:

Admittedly he’s sailing close to the wind, and I genuinely wish he would cross that line, but he’s not daft. He’s a hypocrite, but not daft.

What you say above is very much backed up here

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12539197/BBC-Springwatch-presenter-Chris-Packham-says-ethically-responsible-climate-change-protesters-break-law-warns-oil-refinery-blown-soon.html

where (allegedly) he suggests escalations and moots that may even involve 'blowing up' an oil refinery.

'At the moment, no one is blowing up an oil refinery, but a lot of people think that is very likely to happen.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...