Thinker

I thought the deal was that they'll just take whatever compensation they have to pay out of the prize pot (perhaps over a few years). I'm more interested in the exposure of skullduggery that this court case may bring about.

I alluded to this in the sentence that followed the one you highlighted. What you say is true of some probably, but certainly not of all. Just because you don't like the way the BLM campaign has been carried out (and their certainly is much to criticise) that doesn't mean the core aim of reducing racism isn't worthy or warranted. I didn't claim anyone said he was a hero - all I did was reassert that he isn't one. Which part of the statement: "And an EDL supporting hooligan who pulls a counter-protest stunt is not some kind of hero" is the untruth?

Trump's pretty much turned American politics into "I'm the King of the Castle", (nah-nah-nahnah-nah). His capacity to enrage people has undoubtedly exacerbated the social unrest that's currently sweeping the world. So, not especially amusing or admirable in this instance.

It's clear that we disagree on some pretty fundamental points here. It's no more true to say that BLM have allowed themselves to be infiltrated by antifa, than it is to say that the movement to protect memorials allowed themselves to be infiltrated by the EDL. At any demonstration, or pretty much any public event, if you look around yourself I guarantee you'll see people who take it far too seriously, or are taking things to extremes. That's true of a protest, or a football match, or even of a concert. The undeniable fact that a minority of BLM demonstrators have extrapolated the cause to its illogical extreme, doesn't mean that all of BLM is bad, and it certainly doesn't mean that everyone who opposes BLM (e.g. Jake Hepple) is good. The footballers wearing shirts with anti-racist slogans the other night weren't thinking of how great it would be to tear down every statue of Sir Winston Churchill. Admittedly, some of them probably weren't thinking of much beyond how great this was going to play for their public image; but many of them, particularly those black players from a tough background, were thinking "There's too much racism in society - we should address that." That's really not something that should upset anyone. It's not a vacuous aim. It's the message that we shouldn't allow the other crap to detract from. If you move far enough in either direction on the political spectrum there's a danger you can lose sight of the range of ideals at the other end - they blur into one ugly, distant mass. I'm sure you'd agree that, people of an overly liberal mind-set can start to imagine fascism wherever anyone suggests the merest hint of a positive, default, social norm, and that's plainly a skewed and daft perspective. It results in ridiculous over-reactions to innocuous things (outrage at separate male and female toilets, for example). It's equally true that, if you're conservative-minded enough, you can start to see any liberalism as the thin end of the wedge. You can begin to see any campaign for social change as the start of a breakdown of traditional social values and a descent into anarchy. That's not the case though. Some change is necessary, some inevitable. A group of footballers with slogans on their shirt are not antifa. And an EDL supporting hooligan who pulls a counter-protest stunt is not some kind of hero.

Yeah, it's a quirk that I think is most prevalent amongst Scottish RCs. A weak attempt to feminise a masculine name, normally in order to call a girl after a male relative. Plenty of Davidina's knocking about in the older generation, for another example. Normally shortened to "Ina".

I think they'll get him for something other than banner and I suspect, when they do, he'll probably be bang-to-rights. But we shall see.

What you're doing here is characterising all of BLM using the worst behaviour of the worst element that has attached itself to the movement. That's analogous to attempts to paint the citizens who went out to defend public monuments and memorials as far-right thugs - by focusing on the tiny minority of far-right thugs who showed up and attempted to hijack the project. If you look at any scenario from a hopelessly polarised point of view you're clearly going to be blind to the gradations. Also, a bit of further reading on Jake Hepple reveals he's a member of the delightful "Suicide Squad" Burnley hooligan firm. So my predictions that he's both a racist and an arsehole appear to be spot on. Is that a suitable voice of the "silent majority" to be back-slapped and celebrated? Just as antifa do more harm than good to the BLM campaign, Hepple has done more harm than good to any attempt to sensibly point out the flaws in the extremist elements of BLM. Like so many debates in the time of social media (Brexit, Independence etc.) the "conversation" is getting sucked into a feedback loop of blinkered twattery.

I'm sure you're right, but given the haste with which Mr Hepple has attempted to delete his social media history, I wouldn't be surprised if an investigation unearthed something incriminating.

Once again, being against racism doesn't equal being in antifa or being anti-British. Oh, and BTW, this just in. https://metro.co.uk/2020/06/23/burnley-fan-who-arranged-white-lives-matter-banner-refuses-apologise-12890013/ Is this the part where you say that you think the EDL make a lot of good points and Tommy Robinson is just misunderstood?

Nonsense. For one thing, I didn't label them racists, I merely said that it's likely that the perpetrators of this are racists - Thanks for highlighting that. But if it turns out that they're not racist (or there's insufficient evidence to prove it) then I can say with absolute confidence that they're definitely arseholes. Secondly, as I pointed out, there's a difference between the anti-British, anti-authority lunatic fringe who have attached themselves to BLM (whom we should be pissed off with), and the central message of BLM, which is that racism is a bad thing. If the banner had said "Antifa are hijacking BLM", for example, that could never have been misconstrued as racist, and I'd have agreed with it to an extent. But anyone who takes the hump at a show of anti-racism such as the display at the Burnley - Man CIty match (sentimental as you may find it) to the extent that they feel the need to organise an elaborate counter-demonstration has got a real problem. The whole thing represents an absolute humiliation for Burnley FC, and I really feel for the club. It is no way the work of a "silent majority" of their fans - it's a tiny minority of morons who have been rightly castigated. And if you honsetly think that fly past is in any way a positive thing, then I feel truly embarrassed on your behalf.

They probably will, because it seems extremely likely that they are actually racists. It's one thing to sit at home rolling your eyes at celebrities virtue signalling on telly, or to be pissed off by antifa thugs hijacking demonstrations; but organising a fucking plane and banner as a counter demonstration? That's messed up. That's not a thought, that's an action that ought to be policed. There are arseholes on both the extreme left and the extreme right trying to use the rights and wrongs of the BLM demonstrations to push their agendas. I hope they all end up in jail.

Don't let an aborigine hear you say that! Certainly not in the current climate.

It'll be instead of the wee Utilita ad.

Well, I'm going to have to block you then, which is a shame because, like I said, I think you do a great job forwarding the club information. My favourite thing about gersnet is that it's a good way to get actual information, as opposed to the unfiltered bilge that sloshes around online. Clearly you're free to post shite if you want, but what's the point? Don't you think it's better to forward info from verifiable sources rather than the spamming out the ravings of unashamedly biased and unaccountable twitter clowns?

Compare the bottom left image in the first quote with the second. Clear fakery at work. I daresay whoever doctored the image originally intended it as a bit of satire, but that seems to be lost on the twitterers who've passed it on, and shite like this perfectly illustrates what's wrong with twitter. However biased the "main stream" media might be, it's better than social media, where nobody seems to give a flying fuck if what they post is true. It's totally counter-productive. Ian, I really appreciate you putting the Rangers feed stuff up for those of us who abstain, but (and I mean this in the kindest possible way) do you really need to post the entire contents of your political social media bubble? If I really wanted to read this kind of crap, I'd sign up and follow the bullshit merchants directly.