Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[albitz]

I have not (deliberately) been controversial on here for some time but now....................................................................


I am never one for violence and war, that is my way. 

But I am becomingly increasingly amused by how many members who post their feelings on what the Government are up to, how the EU is somehow stitching us all up, how we are being conned by the "Climate change" lobby, with alternative power generation, and as for "Green" policies along with anything to do with the Environmental controls, well, the 'anger' 'similes' shown display real negative reaction.

However get a movement of young students (and yes other politically motivated individuals) protesting in the strongest terms, getting off their backsides, and actually trying to turn the tide and their is much derision!!

In my youth young. and old, protested over the Vietnam War with very active action outside the American Embassy in London; there was "Ban The Bomb" marches, the LSE (London School of Economics) were continually protesting everywhere about Political decisions of the Government; then we had Unionist throughout the 70s & 80s stirring up trouble, with the Coal Miners Strike of 84/85 causing real violence; but the "Poll Tax" action by students and every politically  active person causing mayhem, and Maggie backing down!!.  Now what are "we" all doing?  Oh, we had mass protests over the Iraq war, but what else.  No we moan about this that and the other on here, but then when a group takes action the "commitment" of some definitely weakens!!

Amazing!  Talk about double standards!  Sometimes to bring about change direct action is required otherwise the Political landscape stays the same.  Thank God I say for the London Correspondence Society, the Chartists of the 1830s/40s, and the earlier Tolpuddle Martyrs, along with many others who took direct action otherwise nothing would have changed!!
 

I would guess nthat I am one of those you refer to Lizzie.
I have no problem with anyone making a legitimate protest, but what has happened today was wanton destruction and sickening violence. Totally unjustifiable and I look forward to you condemning it.
I have no doubt whatsoever that this protest was infiltrated and hijacked by rent a mob anarchists, and socialist workers party activists - its surprising how few of them actually work.
They were on the roof of Tory HQ chucking concrete and a fire extinguisher at the heads of police officers, while their mates were inside the building wrecking it and trying to set fire to it.
One of them was interviewed live on Sky news from the roof.
She was proud of what was happening, she wasnt a student. She stated that she was paid a salary to be a full time activist/ protester. I would like to know who pays her salary.
If there is any reason for the general public to sympathise with the students, it was completely wrecked today by these morons.
There will be more protests in the coming months, and Im certain the same faces will pop up at each one, with the intention of causing as much mayhem as possible.

[TheBoy]

New Labour has degraded degrees to such a point, virtually every job advert now requires one. A degree is nothing special now.

I do strongly disagree with the protesters.  If that is your chosen direction, you should bloody well have to pay for it!  Every time I have been to college for evening classes, I have had to pay full price.  When she did her degree, she had to pay full price (although her work subsidised parts of it).  Why should our taxes pay for the work shy teenagers to do a pointless non-subject course?

[markfree]

Viva la Revolution

[Lizzie_Zoom]

I have not (deliberately) been controversial on here for some time but now....................................................................


I am never one for violence and war, that is my way. 








I would guess nthat I am one of those you refer to Lizzie.
I have no problem with anyone making a legitimate protest, but what has happened today was wanton destruction and sickening violence. Totally unjustifiable and I look forward to you condemning it.
I have no doubt whatsoever that this protest was infiltrated and hijacked by rent a mob anarchists, and socialist workers party activists - its surprising how few of them actually work.
They were on the roof of Tory HQ chucking concrete and a fire extinguisher at the heads of police officers, while their mates were inside the building wrecking it and trying to set fire to it.
One of them was interviewed live on Sky news from the roof.
She was proud of what was happening, she wasnt a student. She stated that she was paid a salary to be a full time activist/ protester. I would like to know who pays her salary.
If there is any reason for the general public to sympathise with the students, it was completely wrecked today by these morons.
There will be more protests in the coming months, and Im certain the same faces will pop up at each one, with the intention of causing as much mayhem as possible.

What have I written at the start of my thread Albs?  That is what I said and that is what I meant

What I have done is hopefully opened up another line of thought.  What I have stated, in so many words is we all continue to voice annoyance, disatisfaction, and pure anger over what is done in our name, on especially the issues I have quoted.  Yet how many of all of us are prepared to take it further. 

The scale of human action ranges from just talking about a subject of real concern, through writing to the local press, taking it forward into the nationals, forming an action group, running for Parliament, right to the extreme of violent direct action.  What is right?  The violent action is normally not justified, although the Chartists did achieve indirect political  change of "the establishment" that gave just enough to the public to deflate the aims of the masses (who in Aug 1819 had been violently attacked by government troops at the Peterloo Massacre) proving that it is the establishment of the time who can still commit violence to achieve their dubious aims; Northern Ireland 1968 - 1998, the Iraq War, and the existing Afghanistan War!!

What I am therefore highlighting is how we can all huff and puff about things, but some do far more, including always our Government.  They always have and always will!  What us as a society must decide is do we want the Political landscape to remain the same, or do we want to do something radical to force change.  That is were our personal standards, morals, and conscience enters the fray!

What the "students" are doing is showing political anarchy which 'in youth' may seem very attractive, as any Friday night punch up in Folkestone may appear!

So we have us on here who jabber away, and may do nothing more than rant.  Fair enough that is everyone's right, and in many cases you can do no more!  But what I say is don't automatically condemn those who voice their political argument in more physical terms. What has led those to take that action is the question to be asked.  What has society done to produce that level of anger?  Is it a minority, or a bigger underground flow of political agitation?

Who knows, but in this instance the level of violence is way beyond acceptable levels.

Just as Field Marshal Douglas Haig, the establishment, was capable of committing violence using hundreds of thousands of British lives during 1914 -18.  As now the British Government is using British lives in violence and death on foreign territory (for right or wrong reasons).  Would public protests and violence have made a difference during the Great War; would violent protest now change the Governments approach to Afghanistan?

Well we will probably never know the answer to both as all we shall see is plenty of huff and puff, but no one blowing down the establishment by a long way!

Not like the Chartists did..................................

[Lizzie_Zoom]

................back to Students, and those at university!

Why do so many want to knock these often highly intelligent youngsters who just want to do the best with their lives, and through their endeavours will provide this country with the talent and expertise that it will need to remain a world leader?  Their future careers will undoubtedly mean that this country can feed itself, with all citizens gaining advantage from that as envisaged by the philospher Plato.

Please believe me when I say that they are not all time wasters - yes of course there are some, but they drop out by the second year!  The vast majority are very justified to be at university and many should become professionals earning valuable GDP for Great Britain.  That will pay our pensions and feed our grand children.

No, not everyone can possibly go to uni, but those who do should be assisted, It is in all our interests.

[Dishevelled Den]

What have I written at the start of my thread Albs?  That is what I said and that is what I meant

What I have done is hopefully opened up another line of thought.  What I have stated, in so many words is we all continue to voice annoyance, disatisfaction, and pure anger over what is done in our name, on especially the issues I have quoted.  Yet how many of all of us are prepared to take it further. 

The scale of human action ranges from just talking about a subject of real concern, through writing to the local press, taking it forward into the nationals, forming an action group, running for Parliament, right to the extreme of violent direct action.  What is right?  The violent action is normally not justified, although the Chartists did achieve indirect political  change of "the establishment" that gave just enough to the public to deflate the aims of the masses (who in Aug 1819 had been violently attacked by government troops at the Peterloo Massacre) proving that it is the establishment of the time who can still commit violence to achieve their dubious aims; Northern Ireland 1968 - 1998, the Iraq War, and the existing Afghanistan War!!

What I am therefore highlighting is how we can all huff and puff about things, but some do far more, including always our Government.  They always have and always will!  What us as a society must decide is do we want the Political landscape to remain the same, or do we want to do something radical to force change.  That is were our personal standards, morals, and conscience enters the fray!

What the "students" are doing is showing political anarchy which 'in youth' may seem very attractive, as any Friday night punch up in Folkestone may appear!

So we have us on here who jabber away, and may do nothing more than rant.  Fair enough that is everyone's right, and in many cases you can do no more!  But what I say is don't automatically condemn those who voice their political argument in more physical terms. What has led those to take that action is the question to be asked.  What has society done to produce that level of anger?  Is it a minority, or a bigger underground flow of political agitation?

Who knows, but in this instance the level of violence is way beyond acceptable levels.

Just as Field Marshal Douglas Haig, the establishment, was capable of committing violence using hundreds of thousands of British lives during 1914 -18.  As now the British Government is using British lives in violence and death on foreign territory (for right or wrong reasons).  Would public protests and violence have made a difference during the Great War; would violent protest now change the Governments approach to Afghanistan?

Well we will probably never know the answer to both as all we shall see is plenty of huff and puff, but no one blowing down the establishment by a long way!

Not like the Chartists did..................................

 

proving that it is the establishment of the time who can still commit violence to achieve their dubious aims; Northern Ireland 1968 - 1998,

Could you expand on that a bit for me Lizzie?

[Lizzie_Zoom]

What have I written at the start of my thread Albs?  That is what I said and that is what I meant

What I have done is hopefully opened up another line of thought.  What I have stated, in so many words is we all continue to voice annoyance, disatisfaction, and pure anger over what is done in our name, on especially the issues I have quoted.  Yet how many of all of us are prepared to take it further. 

The scale of human action ranges from just talking about a subject of real concern, through writing to the local press, taking it forward into the nationals, forming an action group, running for Parliament, right to the extreme of violent direct action.  What is right?  The violent action is normally not justified, although the Chartists did achieve indirect political  change of "the establishment" that gave just enough to the public to deflate the aims of the masses (who in Aug 1819 had been violently attacked by government troops at the Peterloo Massacre) proving that it is the establishment of the time who can still commit violence to achieve their dubious aims; Northern Ireland 1968 - 1998, the Iraq War, and the existing Afghanistan War!!

What I am therefore highlighting is how we can all huff and puff about things, but some do far more, including always our Government.  They always have and always will!  What us as a society must decide is do we want the Political landscape to remain the same, or do we want to do something radical to force change.  That is were our personal standards, morals, and conscience enters the fray!

What the "students" are doing is showing political anarchy which 'in youth' may seem very attractive, as any Friday night punch up in Folkestone may appear!

So we have us on here who jabber away, and may do nothing more than rant.  Fair enough that is everyone's right, and in many cases you can do no more!  But what I say is don't automatically condemn those who voice their political argument in more physical terms. What has led those to take that action is the question to be asked.  What has society done to produce that level of anger?  Is it a minority, or a bigger underground flow of political agitation?

Who knows, but in this instance the level of violence is way beyond acceptable levels.

Just as Field Marshal Douglas Haig, the establishment, was capable of committing violence using hundreds of thousands of British lives during 1914 -18.  As now the British Government is using British lives in violence and death on foreign territory (for right or wrong reasons).  Would public protests and violence have made a difference during the Great War; would violent protest now change the Governments approach to Afghanistan?

Well we will probably never know the answer to both as all we shall see is plenty of huff and puff, but no one blowing down the establishment by a long way!

Not like the Chartists did..................................

 

proving that it is the establishment of the time who can still commit violence to achieve their dubious aims; Northern Ireland 1968 - 1998,

Could you expand on that a bit for me Lizzie?

I will try Zulu, but I am sure you know it was, and still is, a very complex issue that goes back for centuries.
 
But from the introduction of British troops into Northern Ireland violence was the norm, and a continuation of the 1922 troubles in certainly one important respect: the creation of a united Ireland.  The British Government of the day did not wish that to happen, so given almost unlimited support to the Unionists.

So Bloody Sunday was one of many incidents that were an unnecessary use of army firepower causing death and further resentment which the actions of the UK Government could have avoided but did not for their own reasons.  The very presence of the British Army caused violence to flare up, and successive governments were just repeating the past British bloody approach to Ireland in general.  Catholics resented their presence, and increased the use of violence, which further agitated the Unionists.  Instead of political dialogue we had violence feeding violence.  Those who live by the sword die by the sword, and that is what developed in NI due to successive governments trying hard to hold on to a bad situation that was crying out for dialogue, and who didn't want to be seen talking to the "terrorists", the IRA, and really didn't want to be seen by the Unionists to be understanding of what all parties wanted, and what could be delivered politically.

Both sides in this awful conflict committed astrocities, and suffered.  The achievement of peace in the end is one thing that Tony Blair can be proud of, but the previous governments actions must be questionable.

[albitz]

The British army went into N.I. at the request of the Nationalist community. The violence had reached a frighteningly high level before the Army arrived on the scene - I know, as I was there.
I  cant see any relevance in comparing an Army in uniform fighting wars, conflicts etc. at the behest of their Govt. and the anarchic thuggery which took place in London today.
I did read the beginning of your post Lizzie, but it didnt come across as an unequivical condemnation of todays violence to me, but I may have misunderstood.
The British Govts have never willingly supported the Unionists, theres nothing they would have liked more than the Unionists to quietly go away, but they wouldnt, and the Govt. had no realistic choice but to allow them their democratic right to remain British subjects and N.I. to remain one of the four constituent countries of this United Kingdom.
They would have had a hell of a job trying to explain themselves, had they taken a different stance, particularily after the Falklands campaign in the early 80,s.
The "achievemnet" had little to do with Bliar. Mo Mowlem did all the work and brokered the deals, then he appeared for the publicity at the announcement stage. He then destroyed her career as an act of malice, as he was jealous of the fact that she got more rcognition for her work than he would have liked,
He couldnt countenance sharing any of the spotlight with someone else.
This peace you speak of is in part, an illusion Lizzie. Things are not what the media portray them as currently, but everyone is desperately trying to keep a lid on things, for fear of the current situation unravelling and escalating.

[Dishevelled Den]

I will try Zulu, but I am sure you know it was, and still is, a very complex issue that goes back for centuries.
 
But from the introduction of British troops into Northern Ireland violence was the norm, and a continuation of the 1922 troubles in certainly one important respect: the creation of a united Ireland.  The British Government of the day did not wish that to happen, so given almost unlimited support to the Unionists.

So Bloody Sunday was one of many incidents that were an unnecessary use of army firepower causing death and further resentment which the actions of the UK Government could have avoided but did not for their own reasons.  The very presence of the British Army caused violence to flare up, and successive governments were just repeating the past British bloody approach to Ireland in general.  Catholics resented their presence, and increased the use of violence, which further agitated the Unionists.  Instead of political dialogue we had violence feeding violence.  Those who live by the sword die by the sword, and that is what developed in NI due to successive governments trying hard to hold on to a bad situation that was crying out for dialogue, and who didn't want to be seen talking to the "terrorists", the IRA, and really didn't want to be seen by the Unionists to be understanding of what all parties wanted, and what could be delivered politically.

Both sides in this awful conflict committed astrocities, and suffered.  The achievement of peace in the end is one thing that Tony Blair can be proud of, but the previous governments actions must be questionable.

 

 

Thanks Lizzie.  I asked a slightly unfair question as (you have pointed out) there is an extensive history contained within that small part of the country.

It was a fundamentally intractable problem that still remains so today.  There may be no overt displays of violence as in the past, but many attitudes remain locked in that same confrontational mode.

This situation is far from settled and I have no doubt that we will see further violence in the near future from both Republican and 'Loyalist' sources.

This was always a difficult problem for successive British Governments to deal with, although it must be said that the period following partition up to the mid 60's Westminster didn't really have much input as there was a duly elected government in place at Stormont. (Whether those successive Stormont Governments held justifiable or effective office is a topic for another discussion)

Over those years Republican violence in the form of the Marxist Irish Republican Army (later to be the Official IRA but unconnected with the legitimate armed forces of the Irish Republic) were largely quiescent only indulging in acts of violence every 10 to 15 years or so all of which were successfully dealt with by the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the Ulster Special Constabulary (a paramilitary reserve force)

So there was always a history in dealing with the 'troublesome rebels' locally.

The sea-change in public opinion felt there and throughout the western world in the mid part of the 60's that resulted from people becoming better educated, having a more liberated attitude and being prepared to display their dissatisfaction by using violence really was the first time Westminster had to become actively involved in the politics of Northern Ireland.

The years leading up to 1973 when the Stormont Parliament was prorogued and direct rule from Westminster introduced were some of the most violent of the 'troubles'.  Had the British Army not been present the RUC would have had a very difficult task in trying to contain widespread community violence.

This period forced military planners to develop new strategies as conventional tactics were oriented towards battlefield confrontation not urban guerrilla warfare so there was a sharp learning curve to be traversed with many mistakes made along the way.

Had James Callaghan not deployed military forces when he did, that province would have descended into civil anarchy that would have spilled over into the Irish Republic and western parts of Scotland.

I would submit therefore that far from being the problem in the recent history of Northern Ireland, Westminster (along with British forces) from Callaghan onward were the only viable solution to the raging problems there and not the causation of them.
 

[Lizzie_Zoom]

As usual Zulu a great summary of the recent events in NI history

I accept of course what you have put in your conclusion is the opinion of many.  My problem is, I suppose, that I have read Irish history, listened to lectures by a leading Irish historian, along with witnessing, albeit only via different forms of media, the bloody events from 1968 to 1998. I have looked at the situation over centuries from both the Irish and English point of view.  All I can see overall is that the English / British Government mis-managed the "Irish problem" for so long, and many a time it was a shameful affair.

[albitz]

I too have read a lot of Irish history and long since came to the conclusion that almost all of it is shamelessly biased towards one  or other side of the divide. As for "experts", I have heard many of them speak on TV and radio, and wondered if they were talking about the same place that I grew up in. I like to think of myself as a free thinking individual, I have little interest in which way the tide is flowing. So I have reached my own conclusions based on my own 20 years of living there,first hand experiences, many conversations with people who have been involved in some way or other, and reading/ listening to the opinions of politicians and "experts" on the subject.
Not much point in me bothering to type them up , as I think Zulu has got it absolutely spot on. Not biased in any way, but objective and factual in a manner which could only come from a good degree of first hand knowledge and a free thinking mind, which isnt easily swayed in one direction or the other by armchair experts etc.

[Broomies Mate]

I thought this was a thread about University Students having to pay for the PRIVILEGE of having a Degree under their belt?

Obvisouly mistaken.  I'll look for it again.

[albitz]

Threads like this often stray into different territory and sometimes even end up full circle, back at the original subject matter.Just like a conversation down the pub 

[Dishevelled Den]

Threads like this often stray into different territory and sometimes even end up full circle, back at the original subject matter.Just like a conversation down the pub 

You're dead-on there son.  While many students are indeed revolting, I met a couple of rather fetching semi-mature students at lunch today both of whom were far from revolting.

[Vamps]

I have not (deliberately) been controversial on here for some time but now....................................................................


I am never one for violence and war, that is my way. 

But I am becomingly increasingly amused by how many members who post their feelings on what the Government are up to, how the EU is somehow stitching us all up, how we are being conned by the "Climate change" lobby, with alternative power generation, and as for "Green" policies along with anything to do with the Environmental controls, well, the 'anger' 'similes' shown display real negative reaction.

However get a movement of young students (and yes other politically motivated individuals) protesting in the strongest terms, getting off their backsides, and actually trying to turn the tide and their is much derision!!
In my youth young. and old, protested over the Vietnam War with very active action outside the American Embassy in London; there was "Ban The Bomb" marches, the LSE (London School of Economics) were continually protesting everywhere about Political decisions of the Government; then we had Unionist throughout the 70s & 80s stirring up trouble, with the Coal Miners Strike of 84/85 causing real violence; but the "Poll Tax" action by students and every politically  active person causing mayhem, and Maggie backing down!!.  Now what are "we" all doing?  Oh, we had mass protests over the Iraq war, but what else.  No we moan about this that and the other on here, but then when a group takes action the "commitment" of some definitely weakens!!

Amazing!  Talk about double standards!  Sometimes to bring about change direct action is required otherwise the Political landscape stays the same.  Thank God I say for the London Correspondence Society, the Chartists of the 1830s/40s, and the earlier Tolpuddle Martyrs, along with many others who took direct action otherwise nothing would have changed!!
 

Protest as such, not from me, I stated on the fireman strike thread that this was only the start... even I am feeling rebellious, and am having to fight even harder for those that I look after.......Work wise, not home