A Political Thread

[Peat]

The prostitution is a non-story to me. Prostitution should be legal and accepted anyway.

But tbf, I think cheating on a partner (provided his wife did not agree to it) may well be the worst non-illegal thing you can do to someone. I think it is even worse than a lot of illegal acts. It is something that a lot of people might fairly judge someone's character on. Does that make it sufficiently of public interest to override the privacy? Does it affect Vaz's ability to do a job? Difficult questions tbh.

The fact this is all relevant to the committee he's on adds a bit of spice and genuine justification for the media too. Plus the drugs.

 

[McTallshort]

And he employed one of the boys he was renting

 

[ncurd]

what's wrong with white people protesting for black people? if that didn't happen i think sadly the united states would still have slavery

Fair point! Except it's not like these people couldn't find a token black guy to take part if they represent a group like BLM and the fact they are in inner city London.

Sadly the black angle was just so they could try to gain more traction on their climate change protest.

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

To be honest... I'm not aware of what protest your talking about
But it kind of sounds like they are appropriating black causes to achieve their own means... Which is really really ****ed up

 

[Which Tyler]

To be honest... I'm not aware of what protest your talking about
But it kind of sounds like they are appropriating black causes to achieve their own means... Which is really really ****ed up

That's exactly what BLM is in the UK I'm afraid. Unpopular precisely because of that.

 

[McTallshort]

That's exactly what BLM is in the UK I'm afraid. Unpopular precisely because of that.

Their quoted facts and figures we also badly exposed on a Radio 4 program last week (yes im that old). I can really understand why BLM would have cause to protest in the USA as there would appear to be real race relation problems their but in the UK? sorry lived in Nottingham and have to say the last 20 years have seen the complete integration between the white and African/West Indian communities.

 

[Which Tyler]

Their quoted facts and figures we also badly exposed on a Radio 4 program last week (yes im that old). I can really understand why BLM would have cause to protest in the USA as there would appear to be real race relation problems their but in the UK? sorry lived in Nottingham and have to say the last 20 years have seen the complete integration between the white and African/West Indian communities.

I wouldn't go quite that far - but, yeah, jumping on the BLM movement from the states for the minimal issues here is really distasteful; even if it were for that, rather than basically a separate issue looking to hijack BLM.

On one side of the pond you have cops killing black men and having no consequences to face. On the other you have... issues relating to poverty and crime rather than race...

 

[McTallshort]

I wouldn't go quite that far - but, yeah, jumping on the BLM movement from the states for the minimal issues here is really distasteful; even if it were for that, rather than basically a separate issue looking to hijack BLM.

On one side of the pond you have cops killing black men and having no consequences to face. On the other you have... issues relating to poverty and crime rather than race...

Are you from Nottingham? But yes our issues are poverty and crime the Americans seem obsessed with the issue of race in a way I cannot get my head round but then Im not American.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I did love the comments about Global warming being racist though.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...crisis-london-city-airport-black-lives-matter

I agree with BLM UK is that they are protesting against things that happens to the general Lower classes anyway not just them IMO.

They are turning what should be a class thing into a race thing and it will only make things worse IMO.


America historically has had racial tensions for a long long long time and it is prob something that will never heal esp as long as Police keep shooting people for no justified reason and not face punishment.

 

[Groundhog]

They tried to have a BLM thing in Dublin like. They did say to be fair it was in solidarity with the US but believe it or not 5 black people and 20 white people doing arts degrees didn't attract international attention. Everyone else just rolled their eyes.

 

[j'nuh]

The fact this is all relevant to the committee he's on adds a bit of spice and genuine justification for the media too. Plus the drugs.

The committee thing does make it a case of public interest, but I'm probably on the side that he can keep his position. It isn't like he's supposed to be impartial, and it doesn't look like he's broken any laws.

Saying all this, I think what the media has been covering has been fairly disgraceful. Paying for prostitutes is legal, attacking him with the embarrassing things he's said to them is missing the point of what he did that was wrong. Attacking his use/recommendation of poppers is arguably even worse.

 

[McTallshort]

Is poppers a drug now?

 

[Which Tyler]

Is poppers a drug now?

Assuming we're not talking about clothes fastenings - then yes; a perfectly legal vasodilator.

 

[Which Tyler]

what's wrong with white people protesting for black people? if that didn't happen i think sadly the united states would still have slavery

I found the article I was wanting to link to the other day.
http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/the-white-man-in-that-photo/

Sometimes photographs deceive. Take this one, for example. It represents John Carlos and Tommie Smith’s rebellious gesture the day they won medals for the 200 meters at the 1968 Summer Olympics in Mexico City, and it certainly deceived me for a long time.

I always saw the photo as a powerful image of two barefoot black men, with their heads bowed, their black-gloved fists in the air while the US National Anthem, “The Star-Spangled Banner,†played. It was a strong symbolic gesture â€" taking a stand for African American civil rights in a year of tragedies that included the death of Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy.

It’s a historic photo of two men of color. For this reason I never really paid attention to the other man, white, like me, motionless on the second step of the medal podium. I considered him as a random presence, an extra in Carlos and Smith’s moment, or a kind of intruder. Actually, I even thought that that guy â€" who seemed to be just a simpering Englishman â€" represented, in his icy immobility, the will to resist the change that Smith and Carlos were invoking in their silent protest. But I was wrong.

...

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

I found the article I was wanting to link to the other day.
http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/the-white-man-in-that-photo/

I'm struggling to find the point in your post

The civil rights movement only got what they wanted BECAUSE white people joined in with them in both marching and the political process. When a minority lacks representation in policitics they rely on the majority to stand up for them.

Like seriously. Wtf is the argument in your post?

1. The author is stupid
Idk, possibly

Seriously that's the only one I can guess

 

[Which Tyler]

Could it possibly have been that I was agreeing with you? And linking a particularly iconic example of your point? Whilst simultaneously linking a very good article about a disgracefully little known aspect of that iconic example?

Out of interest, why do you think the author is stupid?

 

[pagliaccio_euforico]

Could it possibly have been that I was agreeing with you? And linking a particularly iconic example of your point? Whilst simultaneously linking a very good article about a disgracefully little known aspect of that iconic example?

Out of interest, why do you think the author is stupid?

i'm sorry man, i just misgauged that pretty badly

 

[Which Tyler]

Fair enough, it happens - especially when you're passionate and fighty about the subject, ajnd the new poster isn't absolutely clear.

Just having a discussion elsewhere (actually, the discussion I found that article on Peter Norman for); and have realised something very relevant to this mis-understanding; and a very similar one in t'other discussion. I'll just copy/paste, rather than trying to find different words for basically the same thing. I specifically reference this mis-understanding too.
The discussion elsewhere is about Kapernicks, and whether it's his responsibility to provide a clear manifesto for BLM if he's the one making a stand; and whether individual support actually changes anything directly. I argue that that's the movement's job, Kapernicks is trying to draw attention and discussion onto the movement itself; and that it doesn't need to.

I don't mean to imply that you don't support his cause, or that you don't think he has the right to protest, or even that you don't think he has the right to protest in this specific manner; and I'm almost certainly addressing points that you're not making, largely because this thread isn't happening in a vacuum, and I'm involved in other discussions here and elsewhere about BLM in the USA, BLM in the UK, whether some protestors are using BLM to push an entirely different message, whether it's right for people to be offended on other peoples' behalves* etc etc. In my reply to you, I'm trying to address the points you raise - but I will inevitably fail, and get onto my own high horse, or address issues you haven't raised, or have mentioned in passing, not in support. Sorry.

* For which, see that same article I linked above about Peter Norman.

It's what got me thinking about these discussions not happening in a vacuum; and probably because I'd discussed my view here, I more-or-less just posted the article without comment there (possibly in fear of repeating myself, and partly losing track of what I've said where); so the poster I was supporting took my meaning to be the polar opposite, possibly making the same assumptions about that 1 image as everyone else does; all because I had explained myself fully in 1 forum, then didn't do so an hour later in another.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Lol Clinton is going after a Cartoon Frog Meme.

Down with Pepe the Frog!!!!!!!

2016 the year the world got so much weirder.

 

[Which Tyler]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-37336678
The All Party Parliamentary Group wants the Home Office to reclassify herbal cannabis under existing drug laws, from schedule one to schedule four.

This would put it in the same category as steroids and sedatives and mean doctors could prescribe cannabis to patients, and chemists could dispense it.


About bloody time IMO