So a vigil for those who died in war, but not allowed to protest about those who are about to die in war?
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
A lot of us had a horrible feeling this would happen. If someone ends up dying today, Braverman has blood on her hands.
So you can have a silent vigil and give thanks for the ending of ONE war, but can’t mark this occasion with calls for another war to end?
Explain that one to me like I’m an 8yr old please cause that just doesn’t make sense!
On the first part of your comment, on remembrance weekend the answer would be 'yes'. As I understand it the protest march's have taken place over an number of weekends and will continue after this weekend, so the answer to the second part is 'No' they should be allowed protest but not on this weekend.
My suggestion was that a 'silent vigil' would have serve both aspects and been a compromise that such as Braverman wouldn't have been able to make political capital from.
Sorry, I assume you are not 8 years old, and if you cannot differentiate as an adult then there is not much more to add, remembrance is not protest and visa-versa. I just thought a silent vigil would/could have been a compromise and prevented others making political capital.
Football grounds are going to be very quiet this weekend as everybody has to be silent. No talking in the back there!
Braverman is a piece of shit.
Pretty sure this isn’t what she was hoping to incite.
I can completely understand the difference, but I think your excuse for it is nonsensical.
People are gathering en-masse in peace to exercise the freedoms that people sacrificed their lives for, to call for the cessation of a war.
People who claim honour the memory of the fallen and attack this freedom of peaceful expression are either lying to themselves or others about their views on one or the other.
Good thing the EDL crew don’t give a shit about optics.
She'll become more and more desperate as she's scared she will outlive her usefullness and that the people she's sold her soul to, the fascist Tories, might suddenly decide that having a non-white faced person from an immigrant family as their spokesperson is no longer needed.
Then why ask for an explanation as an 8 year old?
If you cannot differentiate between protest and remembrance, then I can see why you hold that view.
Seeing all of those ‘patriots’ heading to the Cenotaph, barely a poppy between the lot of them.
It’s almost as if they’re not actually patriots at all, just morons looking for a fight.
Although I’m sure if they did it silently then some on the board wouldn’t mind.
It’s almost as if they’re not actually patriots at all, just morons looking for a fight.
Although I’m sure if they did it silently then some on the board wouldn’t mind.
Let's play a game of Casual Reader. Imagine you're browsing the BBC website when you stumble across this main headline.
And then you read the first few paragraphs.
Why do they write this with such ambiguity? Why does it not directly say who the "far right groups" are and how they're unrelated to the Pro-Palestinian march (which is more of an anti war march than anything else). Why does it create an air of uncertainty over what they're actually trying to report?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67383065
And then you read the first few paragraphs.
Why do they write this with such ambiguity? Why does it not directly say who the "far right groups" are and how they're unrelated to the Pro-Palestinian march (which is more of an anti war march than anything else). Why does it create an air of uncertainty over what they're actually trying to report?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67383065
Well I have just been watching the parade and there were a number of pro Ukrainians there.
It's a good example of what not to do isn't it? The dumb feckers think they are encouraging support when they are actually turning it off.
EDL = key bump patriots.
So much gammon.
So predictable and so utterly depressing. Broken country with utter scum in charge.
Oh, well this looks like news to me, so i'm guessing this would be on the BBC webs...
Wonder what @Maticmaker thinks.
This would not have happened if we hadn't had multiculturalism. Or something.
The boyz are not ‘avin it, you kant!!
Let’s defend the Cenotaph by attacking the police defending the Cenotaph.
What a surprise. The Tory controlled BBC have no reports on the far right, Braverman enabled idiots disrupting armistice.
We are living in a fascist state.
On the positive side from the reports it’s seem like there’s less than 3,000 far right supporters. It’s really only a tiny fraction of British society.
Weird how that same logic is never applied to other groups by the politicians and media, isn't it?
If this was taking place in the Middle East, these same people would be taking to Twitter and the Daily Mail comments section asking "where are the women?? why is it only men?"
Daily Mail trying their best to cover up who is doing the fighting
The really strange thing is in the UN votes the UK has been surprisingly pretty decent. Voted yesterday to declare Israeli settlements in Occupied Palestine as illegal. Means nothing overall sadly.
They're not in London this weekend.
HIstorically we have been, because of the relative independence of the Foreign Office. To be honest as the UK's power has waned, we have never really stepped out of line at the UN. Our last veto may have been as far back as Southern Rhodesia in the 1970s. I suspect that we hide behind the US veto a lot, and we are allowed to 'vote our conscience' as we know the measures will never pass.
https://twitter.com/theipaper/status/1723304790157832598?s=20
Let's see what mental gymnastics you try to explain how inappropriate this was…
So the march came and went, 300,000 people with close to no trouble from the solidarity marchers. Meanwhile a bunch of far-right smooth brained idiots, galvanised by Cruella decide to storm the cenotaph and fight the police. Really went to plan there eh Cruella?
Fortunately for her not many news outlets are reporting the fights with police in a direct way.
Cheers for this.
Why are the news outlets calling the far group counter protesters, they weren't there to protest but to get coked up/drunk and cause trouble
Because calling them "the EDL" would show that Braverman's dog whistling about how "Islamists" were going to cause the problems today turned out to be the complete and utter shite.