Far-right protests

[najaB]

Not a very tolerant democracy then? 'Capitulation' to what? People who don't want the current levels of immigration, dislike the quantity of immigrants: if they get together they are 'hate groups' and are to be destroyed and scattered?

Yes. Genuine hate groups - those who advocate and encourage violence towards specific groups (eg. based on religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.) - need to be destroyed. Note it is the group that needs to be destroyed, not the people who are members of the group.

 

[Busaholic]

Unless of course you are talking about the Spellow Library in Walton where no books will be thrown at anyone as the lunatics burnt it down.

Burning books was a favourite of the Nazis and is also favoured by the Ayatollahs in Iran. I suspect the culprits in this would far rather be compared to one rather than the other.

 

[ainsworth74]

Not a very tolerant democracy then? 'Capitulation' to what? People who don't want the current levels of immigration, dislike the quantity of immigrants: if they get together they are 'hate groups' and are to be destroyed and scattered?

You are entitled to protest a policy and, indeed, Government that you do not like. You are entitled to argue and campaign for policies to be changed or new policies to be introduced. You are entitled to raise awareness of issues that concern you and other people. You are entitled to do all these things individually or in groups.

You are not entitled to commit arson. You are not entitled to burn out a Citizens Advice Bureau. You are not entitled to attempt set fire to a hotel housing asylum seekers. You are not entitled to beat up people on the basis of their skin colour. You are not entitled to roam the streets smashing cars up and setting them on fire. You are not entitled to walk down a street smashing every window on every house. You are not entitled to fight with the police injuring dozens of them. You are not entitled to terrify and scare members of an ethnic minority just because of the colour of their skin or their religion. These are not a legitimate forms of protest. They not a legitimate way of exercising a political voice. They are not a legitimate way of seeking to effect political change.

A democracy that gives in to those who would attempt to seek to make change in that way will not remain a democracy for much longer. So yes, groups of people who do that must face the full force of the law and must be punished severely, swiftly and without fear or favour.

If you cannot see how what has happened on the streets these pasts few days is different from a legitimate protest then I'm not sure anyone can help you at this point.

During 2011 goverment and CPS leant heavily on the Judges to blanket deny bail and largely they did , but it was a different time and different judiciary than so who knows what will happens. Usually remand is done in Category B prisons but extended stays in police custody due to insufficient space has been happening

It's only one data point but following the Gazette's coverage of Teesside Magistrates where the first thugs from Sunday's riot in Middlesbrough were in the dock to hear their please all but one or two were denied bail.

Here is the a summary of all the cases Teesside Live covered on Tuesday.

Andrew Livingstone​

Andrew Livingstone appeared in the dock at Teesside Magistrates’ Court charged with unlawful violence on August 4, in Middlesbrough. Wearing a white vest top he confirmed his identity to the court. The Clifton Street, Middlesbrough defendant, indicated a not guilty plea as Judge Mallon warned the public in the gallery about moving between cases during the hearing.


She told the 53-year-old defendant: “As I’m sure you’ve been told this matter is too serious to be dealt with here and must be held at the crown court.” The defendant was remanded in custody to appear at Teesside Crown Court on August 27. He was accompanied by a dock officer.

Thomas Rodgers​

Rodgers, 22, of Wicklow Street, Middlesbrough, pleaded guilty to unlawful violence and being in possession of an offensive weapon, namely rocks. He was committed for sentence on August 27 at Teesside Crown Court.

Youth defendant​

During the morning court session, a youth defendant appeared at Teesside Magistrates' Court charged with unlawful violence and possession of an offensive weapon namely an axe. It comes after riots took place in Middlesbrough on August 4. The 16-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, spoke in court to confirm his date of birth and address. He was accompanied by a dock officer.


The teen pleaded not guilty to the weapon offence but did not enter a plea to the other charge. Prosecutor John Garside briefly outlined the case and asked for the defendant to be remanded. Addressing the Thornaby teenager, Judge Mallon said: “Your case will have to go to the crown court. You must appear at the court on the 27th August.” The defendant was remanded to local authority accommodation. Judge Mallon said he must live and sleep at the address, adhere to a curfew and must not enter Middlesbrough.

Connor Stokes​

Connor Stokes, 26, of Mansfield Avenue, Thornaby, denied unlawful violence and was remanded in custody. Stokes, dressed in court in a blue tracksuit, waved and called "see you in a bit" to his family as he was remanded in custody by District Judge Helen Cousins.

Ethan Bowes​

Ethan Bowes, 18, blew a kiss to his mother and father as he faced charges of violent disorder and possession of offensive weapons at Teesside Magistrates' Court. The Guisborough defendant pleaded not guilty to possessing a sharp rock, possession of a sock 'containing a heavy object' and violent disorder following riots in Middlesbrough on August 4. Bowes, of Woodhouse Road, confirmed his date of birth and address before denying the charges.


The teen, who was dressed in a black Nike t-shirt, was told he would be remanded in custody. Judge Marie Mallon said: “These offences are too serious to be held in this court and must be heard at the crown court.” She told the defendant he must appear at the Middlesbrough court on August 27 for a preliminary hearing.

Joe MacKenzie​

MacKenzie, 28, of Skeldale Grove, Darlington, appeared at Teesside Magistrates' Court where he denied using or threatening unlawful violence. He will face trial before Teesside Crown Court on a date to be fixed.


Nick Woodhouse applied for bail on MacKenzie's behalf but he was remanded by Judge Helen Cousins. He was led to the cells, sobbing.

James Bullock​

Bullock, 20, of Berwick Hills Avenue, Middlesbrough is charged with unlawful violence. He stood in court dressed in a grey Berghaus jacket while accompanied by a dock officer. The defendant pleaded not guilty to the alleged offence which took place on August 4, in Middlesbrough, following a protest. Judge Marie Mallon sent the case to Teesside Crown Court and remanded Bullock in custody until the hearing on August 27.

Jamie Govan​

Wearing a blue t-shirt, Jamie Govan pleaded not guilty to unlawful violence following riots in Middlesbrough on Sunday, August 4. It is alleged that Goven, of Windmill Terrace, Stockton, committed the offence in the Linthorpe Road area.


Prosecutor John Garside asked Judge Marie Mallon to remand the defendant in custody. Addressing the defendant, Judge Mallon said: “This matter is too serious to be tried here at the magistrates’ court that is why I am sending the matter to Teesside Crown Court. The defendant will appear before a judge at the higher court on August 27.

Ashley Ferguson​

New dad Ashley Ferguson, 33, appeared in the dock accompanied by two officers. He is charged with unlawful violence and possession of an offensive weapon, namely a 4ft wooden pole. Wearing a red t-shirt, the Somerset Street, Middlesbrough, defendant, pleaded not guilty to the offences. He was remanded in custody and will appear before a judge on August 27.

Lennon Chisholm​

Middlesbrough’s Lennon Chisholm, 22, of Berwick Hills Avenue sobbed as he identified himself at Teesside Magistrates’ Court. His barrister handed him a tissue as the charge was read out. Chisholm looked up to the gallery as he pleaded not guilty to unlawful violence. The alleged offence took place in Middlesbrough on August 4.


Chisholm’s barrister asked Judge Marie Mallon to grant the defendant bail but he was remanded in custody - covering his face with a tissue as he was addressed. His case was sent to Teesside Crown Crown Court on August 27. “I love you” was shouted from the public gallery as the defendant was taken down to the cells.

Jonathan Ambrose​

Jonathan Ambrose, 33, of Letitia House, was presented at court on Tuesday. He pleaded guilty to violent disorder, committed in Middlesbrough on August 4. He also pleaded guilty to possession of cannabis on the same date.


District Judge Zoe Passfield remanded Ambrose into custody until his next appearance, which will be at Teesside Crown Court on a date which is to be set. Paul Watson, defending, did not make any application for bail.

David Gove​

David Gove, 41, of Brafferton Walk, Middlesbrough, pleaded not guilty to violent disorder. Mr Marley, defending, said Gove sustained a “significant injury” from a police dog.


District Judge Zoe Passfield granted Gove conditional bail. One condition is he must not be a member of a group of more than six people - unless while at work. He will appear at Teesside Crown Court on August 28.

Jonathan Lodge​

Jonathan Lodge, 36, Coatham Road, Redcar, pleaded not guilty to violent disorder in Middlesbrough. He pleaded guilty to possession of cannabis, for which he is given a one day detention. Lodge was remanded in custody and will next appear at Teesside Crown Court on August 28.

Akheel Khan​

Akheel Khan, 24, of Wheatley Close, Middlesbrough, is alleged to have been a counter-protester and is charged with violent disorder. He did not enter a plea on Tuesday. The court heard he is of previous good character and is a university graduate who works as an engineer.


Khan was remanded into custody and will next appear at Teesside Crown Court on August 28.

Carl Robson​

Carl Robson, 29, of Halton Court, Middlesbrough, did not enter a plea to a charge of violent disorder.


Robson was remanded into custody and will next appear at Teesside Crown Court on August 28. Family members told him: “Keep your chin up” as he was led away by security.

Lawrence McGlade​

Lawrence McGlade, 28, of Ellerbeck Way, Ormesby, did not enter a plea to violent disorder when he appeared in the dock. He was remanded into custody until August 28, when he will appear at Teesside Crown Court.

Anthony Brown​

Anthony Brown, 37, of Windsor Road, Middlesbrough is charged with violent disorder, assaulting a police officer and possession of class C drug pregabalin. He did not enter a plea.


The offences are alleged to have been committed on Linthorpe Road.


District Judge Zoe Passfield remanded Brown into custody. He will appear at Teesside Crown Court on August 28.

Named: 17 people in court following violent disorder on Teesside

Many of the suspects denied the charges and all of the cases were sent to Teesside Crown Court

www.gazettelive.co.uk

Also worth noting that for fans of the "two-tier" policing argument that one of those dealt with today was a "counter-protester". They were also remanded.

 

[AlterEgo]

Not a very tolerant democracy then?

Oh no, a democracy which isn't tolerant of people spreading hate, fear, and terror? What is a democracy if it does not protect itself from people intent on causing harm to it?

'Capitulation' to what?

Rioting gangs, racists, thugs, street fascists. Of all types.

People who don't want the current levels of immigration, dislike the quantity of immigrants

This is fine. I also think immigration is too high.

if they get together they are 'hate groups' and are to be destroyed and scattered?

Yes, if they congregate in hate groups which for example, loot stores, or riot and burn asylum seeker hotels, or incite violence.

I have found it mind-numbing how people have conflated the PM's attack on far right thuggery with a tarring of anyone who simply holds views relating to restricting or controlling immigration.

 

[Busaholic]

It seems to be happening in Plymouth tonight.

Plymouth police injured and van damaged in city protests

Police are injured, a police van is damaged and seven people are arrested in Plymouth protests.

www.bbc.co.uk

This is all starting to have the feel of a poor quality modern day attempt at Kristallnacht to me.

Staying quiet on this stuff and looking the other way is not an option if you have any kind of grasp on history.

No surprise, particularly as Monday's Plymouth-based Western Morning News plastered over the front page the message that two groups opposed to each other's viewpoint had each announced this well in advance. The local news Spotlight programme at 6.30 pm featured a reporter talking to and questioning the Hope Not Hate contingent, many of them female, some quite elderly and one younger woman in a wheelchair. All was quiet and orderly, none that I saw wore masks. While he was on air, the Hate Not Hope lot arrived en masse, shouting, gesticulating and the ringleaders already confronting the fewish police.

That BBC report faied to differentiate the behaviour of the two groups, which was misleading to say the least. Later footage sees thugs, some quite young, attacking individual policemen, although none of them appeared to get arrested at that stage.

 

[ainsworth74]

I have found it mind-numbing how people have conflated the PM's attack on far right thuggery with a tarring of anyone who simply holds views relating to restricting or controlling immigration.

One wonders if, at least for some, it might be a convenient approach to take to the PM's response to deliberately conflate the two and to allow them to continue to whip things up to their own political advantage.

 

[TheGuy77]

You are entitled to protest a policy and, indeed, Government that you do not like. You are entitled to argue and campaign for policies to be changed or new policies to be introduced. You are entitled to raise awareness of issues that concern you and other people. You are entitled to do all these things individually or in groups.

You are not entitled to commit arson. You are not entitled to burn out a Citizens Advice Bureau. You are not entitled to attempt set fire to a hotel housing asylum seekers. You are not entitled to beat up people on the basis of their skin colour. You are not entitled to roam the streets smashing cars up and setting them on fire. You are not entitled to walk down a street smashing every window on every house. You are not entitled to fight with the police injuring dozens of them. You are not entitled to terrify and scare members of an ethnic minority just because of the colour of their skin or their religion. These are not a legitimate forms of protest. They not a legitimate way of exercising a political voice. They are not a legitimate way of seeking to effect political change.

A democracy that gives in to those who would attempt to seek to make change in that way will not remain a democracy for much longer. So yes, groups of people who do that must face the full force of the law and must be punished severely, swiftly and without fear or favour.

If you cannot see how what has happened on the streets these pasts few days is different from a legitimate protest then I'm not sure anyone can help you at this point.


It's only one data point but following the Gazette's coverage of Teesside Magistrates where the first thugs from Sunday's riot in Middlesbrough were in the dock to hear their please all but one or two were denied bail.

Named: 17 people in court following violent disorder on Teesside

Many of the suspects denied the charges and all of the cases were sent to Teesside Crown Court

www.gazettelive.co.uk

Also worth noting that for fans of the "two-tier" policing argument that one of those dealt with today was a "counter-protester". They were also remanded.

Interesting that a few were accused of possessing drugs. Wonder what they'd do with them?

 

[RT4038]

Yes. Genuine hate groups - those who advocate and encourage violence towards specific groups (eg. based on religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.) - need to be destroyed. Note it is the group that needs to be destroyed, not the people who are members of the group.

Quite right - genuine hate groups that advocate and encourage violence. Not groups of like minded people who may dislike the current quantity of immigration (for instance)

You are entitled to protest a policy and, indeed, Government that you do not like. You are entitled to argue and campaign for policies to be changed or new policies to be introduced. You are entitled to raise awareness of issues that concern you and other people. You are entitled to do all these things individually or in groups.

Not that you would always think so, with the attempts to conflate every individual or group who dislikes immigration levels and/or multi-culturalism with hate groups in order to discredit their view.

You are not entitled to commit arson. You are not entitled to burn out a Citizens Advice Bureau. You are not entitled to attempt set fire to a hotel housing asylum seekers. You are not entitled to beat up people on the basis of their skin colour. You are not entitled to roam the streets smashing cars up and setting them on fire. You are not entitled to walk down a street smashing every window on every house. You are not entitled to fight with the police injuring dozens of them. You are not entitled to terrify and scare members of an ethnic minority just because of the colour of their skin or their religion. These are not a legitimate forms of protest. They not a legitimate way of exercising a political voice. They are not a legitimate way of seeking to effect political change.

If you cannot see how what has happened on the streets these pasts few days is different from a legitimate protest then I'm not sure anyone can help you at this point.

I don't need any help in discerning this, thank you. I agree with you, but history shows us (French revolution, Suffragettes, Irish question, for instance, but many more) that a kinder/more understanding view of atrocities may well come with the passing of time. Not that I am advocating committing them, of course.

One wonders if, at least for some, it might be a convenient approach to take to the PM's response to deliberately conflate the two and to allow them to continue to whip things up to their own political advantage.

Quite - there are various angles on this.

 

[yorkie]

Also worth noting that for fans of the "two-tier" policing argument that one of those dealt with today was a "counter-protester". They were also remanded.

Sadly, when the truth comes out, as we've seen multiple times, the far-right simply ignore it and continue their narrative. They are not the brightest of people (if they were, they'd not be so racist!)

Oh no, a democracy which isn't tolerant of people spreading hate, fear, and terror? What is a democracy if it does not protect itself from people intent on causing harm to it?


Rioting gangs, racists, thugs, street fascists. Of all types.


This is fine. I also think immigration is too high.


Yes, if they congregate in hate groups which for example, loot stores, or riot and burn asylum seeker hotels, or incite violence.

I have found it mind-numbing how people have conflated the PM's attack on far right thuggery with a tarring of anyone who simply holds views relating to restricting or controlling immigration.

Thanks to you and others, for taking the time to respond to posts which I utterly disagree with, in an eloquent and constructive way, that thoroughly meets with my approval. It saves me having to get worked up and argue with them!

 

[uglymonkey]

"How long do you reckon these protests riots will last for?" . Until the weather gets colder, it starts to rain and the evening draw in.

 

[nlogax]

They are not the brightest of people (if they were, they'd not be so racist!)

This is another element that truly floors me. Witnessing recent events suggests that something has gone very wrong with (amongst many other things) our education system over the last few decades.

 

[yorkie]

This is another element that truly floors me. Witnessing recent events suggests that something has gone very wrong with (amongst many other things) our education system over the last few decades.

That's for another thread, but in summary the issue isn't what goes on within schools (at least schools I am familiar with) but the attitude of some parents and also extremely worrying levels of persistent absence. Perhaps a topic to debate on our next forum walk/meal... In the meantime, if anyone wants to debate the education system further, please do feel free to create a new thread.

 

[alex397]

There does not appear to have been much (if at all) occurring today after a look at a few different news websites. Hopefully this means the end of it.

 

[Busaholic]

"How long do you reckon these protests riots will last for?" . Until the weather gets colder, it starts to rain and the evening draw in.

Given that many of the people involved may also have been associated with football hooliganism, and some with the attempted far-right Whitehall Cenotaph 'protection' last November, it's highly unlikely they'll be dissuaded by the weather. It's only the 'hangers-on' who might disappear.

 

[Darandio]

There does not appear to have been much (if at all) occurring today after a look at a few different news websites. Hopefully this means the end of it.

Apparently not. Today was a day off, tomorrow there are in excess of 30 planned. We'll see.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Apparently not. Today was a day off, tomorrow there are in excess of 30 planned. We'll see.

Thirty?? Wow that is frightening.

 

[brad465]

Capitulating to the angry mobs, the ones setting fire to stuff and scrapping with the Police. If they want to have a proper grown up discussion they need to act like adults. It's quite possible to dislike the quantity of immigrants without also feeling the need to burn down the hotels housing them. The ones that think the latter is an appropriate way of getting their voice heard are simply wrong.

Is the correct answer.

You don't get to act like an animal and have the adults listen to your legitimate political concerns !

Yes while there are underlying issues that need looking at independent of their potential role in this rioting, extremists of any ideology will never ever be satisfied so they should never be appeased.

Meanwhile X and the Space Karen running it have been of no help whatsoever in managing these riots (which is no surprise to anyone who has studied them for 5 minutes); while other social media platforms have worked to remove misinformation, Musk has effectively been stoking either directly ("Civil war is inevitable") or indirectly, by not removing content also stoking unrest:

Musk targets PM again after criticism of UK 'civil war' post

The prime minister's spokesperson previously said there was "no justification" for the comments.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sir Keir Starmer has become embroiled in a war of words with Elon Musk, after the tech billionaire suggested that "civil war is inevitable" following violent unrest in the UK.

The owner of X, formerly Twitter, posted the remarks on the platform in response to a video showing people aiming fireworks at police.

The prime minister's spokesperson said there was "no justification" for Mr Musk's comments, adding there was more that social media companies "can and should be doing".

Mr Musk then replied to a post on X from the prime minister - in which Sir Keir said he would not tolerate attacks on mosques or Muslim communities - asking: "Shouldn't you be concerned about attacks on *all* communities?"

Mr Musk also shared a video of a person purportedly being arrested for offensive comments online, asking: "Is this Britain or the Soviet Union?"

He also replied to a post criticising UK policing, suggesting the police's response "does seem one-sided".

Justice Minister Heidi Alexander has also weighed in against Mr Musk, who has a long history of making controversial remarks online, for his "totally unjustifiable" and "pretty deplorable" comments.

Disorder has now lasted almost a week, following the fatal stabbing of three girls in Southport. The subsequent unrest in towns and cities across England and in parts of Northern Ireland has been fuelled by misinformation online, the far-right and anti-immigration sentiment.

Subscribe to the Financial Times

A subscription to the Financial Times provides you with the insights and perspective you need to succeed, now.

on.ft.com

British officials have faced resistance from X over calls to take down posts that are deemed a threat to national security, as Elon Musk launched a series of jibes on the site about the UK and Sir Keir Starmer.

Though several companies such as Google, Meta and TikTok have been quick to respond by scrutinising and removing flagged posts, X has been less responsive and has kept concerning content up, according to people briefed on its activities.

I am coming round to the belief now that the platform needs shutting down in this country, assuming Musk will not change course. The role it appears to have played in destroying communities, stoking violence and depriving others of their freedom to go about their lives shows it is not fit for access anymore. Of course the ability to close it down is an entirely different kettle of fish.

 

[yorkie]

Musk is bonkers, and is a complete and utter weirdo with major issues; Twitter (I don't call it "x") is now a junk platform.

 

[alex397]

Apparently not. Today was a day off, tomorrow there are in excess of 30 planned. We'll see.

Hopefully all this news of the arrests may have put most hooligans off.

 

[J-2739]

I have seen this list quoted from a Telegram group and it includes where I live. I’m worried but it remains to be seen if anything comes to it. The list could have just been written by a fantasist sitting in their bedroom for all we know. Of course, all it can take is the local group of thugs to see the list and go in to town to cause trouble after a few Carlings, but hopefully all this news of the arrests may have put most hooligans off.

Out of curiosity, would it be possible to copy this list onto this forum?

 

[alex397]

Out of curiosity, would it be possible to copy this list onto this forum?

I’m not sure it’s wise to share it on a public forum.

 

[DarloRich]

I have seen this list quoted from a Telegram group and it includes where I live

I have seen telegram (?) lists of locations ( copied into other SM) of solicitors who deal with asylum cases with comments about how they are going to be dealt with tomorrow. Could just be standard distraction techniques but it is a worry that these "legitimate political concerns" now seem to be focussed on "lefty lawyers" - it is a worrying step. Who is next?

Musk is bonkers, and is a complete and utter weirdo with major issues;

I suspect legislation will be forthcoming dealing with some of the issues he has created. One option could be to make him a publisher and thus liable for comments on his platform. If he wont play ball.................

EDIT - interesting that his blue tick army seem to be laying into Starmer, all calling for him to resign. It is almost like he doesn't like elections unless they return his pet cranks. Musk and Putin must have turned them loose!

 

[Strathclyder]

Musk is bonkers, and is a complete and utter weirdo with major issues; Twitter (I don't call it "x") is now a junk platform.

Meanwhile X and the Space Karen running it have been of no help whatsoever in managing these riots (which is no surprise to anyone who has studied them for 5 minutes); while other social media platforms have worked to remove misinformation, Musk has effectively been stoking either directly ("Civil war is inevitable") or indirectly, by not removing content also stoking unrest:

Musk targets PM again after criticism of UK 'civil war' post

The prime minister's spokesperson previously said there was "no justification" for the comments.

www.bbc.co.uk

Subscribe to the Financial Times

A subscription to the Financial Times provides you with the insights and perspective you need to succeed, now.

on.ft.com

I am coming round to the belief now that the platform needs shutting down in this country, assuming Musk will not change course. The role it appears to have played in destroying communities, stoking violence and depriving others of their freedom to go about their lives shows it is not fit for access anymore. Of course the ability to close it down is an entirely different kettle of fish.

Just when I thought I couldn't dislike that cretin more than I already do, he goes and shoots that big bazoo of his off on this, dragging the PM into a spat that he's obviously on the wrong side of to anyone who's taken even a cursory skim of his past comments and actions before & since he got his grubby little mitts on the house of the blue bird. And for the record, this isn't even the first time in the past year he's suggested Europe (or some part of it) is on the brink of or is sliding towards civil war. Moronic, flagrantly wrong and deliberately spreading falsehoods; all Musk specialties.

He's a painfully stupid, bigoted weirdo who shouldn't be in charge of a popsicle stand, let alone a established social media platform, which he has more or less single-handedly ripped the backside out of, shredded any remaining credibility it may once have had and where he has allowed - and contributed to - the kind of violent, bigoted, ignorant depravity that's played out across the country over the last week to take root virtually unchecked.

Am not sure what route the government can take to ban, or at the very least curb or discourage, the use of Twitter in this country, but it's patently obvious that with that idiot running the place, it's little better than a meth lab engulfed in flames.

E: @DarloRich has put forward a reasonable suggestion in the reply above mine. If he resists or drags his feet, bury him in a legal and financial avalanche that won't stop until he plays ball.

 

[stevetay3]

Why are so many news outlets advertising these events that are supposedly happening tomorrow, this will only result in even more idiots turning up who did not previously know about tomorrow’ happenings

 

[J-2739]

I’m not sure it’s wise to share it on a public forum.

Me neither, come to think of it!

 

[jon0844]

Hopefully all this news of the arrests may have put most hooligans off.

The last list I saw published (well a screen shot of a Facebook group called something like British Patriots and lots of flag emojis) seemed accurate, so we have to assume this is.

Now Tommy, Nigel and others are hardly going to publish or show that list - but they are almost certainly re-tweeting or quoting content from the people who will have the list, so when people click on the other profile and dig a little deeper, find a link to WhatsApp/FB/Telegram/Signal etc then they'll get the list.

This is how some high profile people get to promote the problems with plausible deniability.

The question has to be, who is coming up and planning these lists? Is Tommy working on that in a private group behind the scenes on his sunbed? (I am of course 'just asking questions'....).

 

[Purple Train]

Quite right - genuine hate groups that advocate and encourage violence. Not groups of like minded people who may dislike the current quantity of immigration (for instance)

I agree that there are occasions where the term "hate groups", or derivatives thereupon, are misused against people who neither advocate nor encourage violence. This is not one of those occasions.

These are racist riots, no more, no less. Very possibly, some rather more naïve people who are genuine immigration protesters, and are not violent or racist, attended the early riots - I don't know, I wasn't really following the news at the time - but given what they have turned into, there is now no justification. While the counter-protesters are being more of a hindrance than a help (there is no need for unnecessary confrontation, it's not going to make anything better, is it?), their actions, in general, are nothing compared to the general behaviour of the racist protesters. Any kind of false equivalence is unwise at best and downright dangerous at worst, and some of the comments from right-wing figures I have seen quoted on this thread (thank you all for linking them ) are nothing short of outrageous (with a particular shout-out to Rupert Lowe in post #164).

I'm not very much given to emotive language - certainly not in real life, and hopefully not on this Forum. But there are no words to express the sheer horror of these people's actions. They are not the social conservatives with whom I am politically aligned; they are not the social conservatives whose views I can explain though not excuse; they are, in my view, racists, nothing less.

As I alluded to earlier in this post, I haven't been following the riot coverage too much - there is only so much my blood pressure can take - and am relatively fortunate in terms of being well-placed to avoid them. But any claim that these people are "patriots" or that they are simply "concerned" is utterly and unequivocally wrong. They are the ones who are refusing to integrate into our society, built on peace, goodwill, and unity; they are the ones who show no respect for our customs: politeness, kindness, love, respect, ways of gentleness, paths of peace; they are the ones who seek to impose their own culture: violence, self-importance, enmity, discord.

Quite honestly, it worries me. And if the opposition party attempts to associate with those parliamentarians who have fanned the flames, I fear things could get even nastier.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Musk is bonkers, and is a complete and utter weirdo with major issues; Twitter (I don't call it "x") is now a junk platform.

—— With an ego the size of Mount Everest !

 

[GusB]

You are not entitled to commit arson. You are not entitled to burn out a Citizens Advice Bureau. You are not entitled to attempt set fire to a hotel housing asylum seekers. You are not entitled to beat up people on the basis of their skin colour. You are not entitled to roam the streets smashing cars up and setting them on fire. You are not entitled to walk down a street smashing every window on every house. You are not entitled to fight with the police injuring dozens of them. You are not entitled to terrify and scare members of an ethnic minority just because of the colour of their skin or their religion. These are not a legitimate forms of protest. They not a legitimate way of exercising a political voice. They are not a legitimate way of seeking to effect political change.

If there ever was an award for "post of the month", this would qualify.

Interesting that a few were accused of possessing drugs. Wonder what they'd do with them?

Your question isn't clear. Who are the "they" that you're referring to? If you're asking what the authorities will do with the drugs, the authorities will probably incinerate those substances once they're no longer considered to be evidence. If you're referring to the people who possess the drugs, that very much depends; possession of a small amount may result in a caution but, if you're a magistrate looking to throw the book at someone, it may end up being the difference between a custodial and non-custodial sentence.

Not that you would always think so, with the attempts to conflate every individual or group who dislikes immigration levels and/or multi-culturalism with hate groups in order to discredit their view.

Would you agree that some individuals who "dislike immigration" are also racists? It's quite possible to hold a stance against immigration without hating people who are a different colour or hold different religious beliefs. If we stopped all immigration tomorrow it wouldn't make any difference; the people who are participating in these riots (or, rather, the ones who are fanning the flames) would still be demanding the removal of anyone who isn't white, regardless of whether they were born here or not. It's nothing to do with immigration; it's all about race and white supremacy. I have absolutely no time for this.

Meanwhile X and the Space Karen running it have been of no help whatsoever in managing these riots (which is no surprise to anyone who has studied them for 5 minutes); while other social media platforms have worked to remove misinformation, Musk has effectively been stoking either directly ("Civil war is inevitable") or indirectly, by not removing content also stoking unrest:

Musk is bonkers, and is a complete and utter weirdo with major issues; Twitter (I don't call it "x") is now a junk platform.

I love the term "Space Karen"! Musk can go to hell - he's a moron and the sooner that people realise this, the better.

Out of curiosity, would it be possible to copy this list onto this forum?

That's an extremely stupid idea for the simple reason that this forum ranks quite highly on search engines; put your curiosity on hold.

 

[nw1]

A Government would have to balance the effect and the level of hardship on each group, and the likely effect on social cohesion. Not too sure who would be actively 'pro-immigration' unless it affected them personally.

That is your opinion only. Maybe you don't understand, for example, the libertarian arguments for a pro-immigration standpoint - but some of us do. Or the arguments for enriching society and making it more broad-minded and less homogeneous.

As it happens I also have strong personal reasons for being pro-immigration, in addition to a strong philosophical belief in easy immigration for "non-troublemakers" on libertarian grounds too.

Why shouldn't we, though, especially as it affects social cohesion. It is not 'certain other countries' - please tell me just one third world or Muslim country........ And why - because they know a large quantity of immigration would affect social cohesion, and change the culture of the country. But somehow it is OK for this country.

I don't really understand this "social cohesion" business, I'm afraid. Sounds like a desire for homogeneity, which isn't necessarily a desirable trait.

It also reminds me somewhat of some mildly unpleasant encounters I've had in some countryside pubs where as a so-called "townie" my friends and I have been looked at strangely and made to feel unwelcome. I'm afraid I do not like that attitude at all; my dislike of countryside dwellers complaining about "townies" is the same, basically, as my dislike of native-born people complaining about immigrants.

It's quite normal, IMX, to live amongst people with varying nationalities. In the flats where I live, I have people from Poland, the USA, various African and Asian countries... and a few Brits too. It doesn't bother me; I consider it part of modern life to have neighbours from elsewhere, whether that be other parts of the UK or overseas. I certainly don't feel threatened by my neighbours, and likewise, I don't feel threatened walking around the Asian part of town, for example.

One person's so-called "social cohesion" is another person's insularity. And I'm afraid I dislike insularity with a passion.

It is also interesting (the stats were quoted up-thread, #93) that the places with the strongest Reform vote and/or incidence of riots are also the places which are the most "white". Suggests to me that, once you've lived in a multi-cultural location, you fear it less - and the fear is based on ignorance rather than reality.

But pro-immigrationists (if there is such a niche thing, as opposed to ambivalence)

Again, it's a niche thing in your opinion.

aren't whingeing, because there is nothing to whinge about.

Again, all your opinion. Brexit is certainly something to whinge about, but I don't want to get into a Brexit debate again (!). Just saying that it is something that some of us consider it a major issue and certainly something to complain about.

It just sounds like you have perhaps not mixed with pro-immigration people much. Perhaps I am the same with anti-immigration people, I will admit: I know a few on a "friend of a friend" level but generally try to avoid politics with them.

The Government has not successfully tackled the problem - being ineffective gets no points at all.

Should a government be blamed because it can't fix climate change overnight, even though it might have tried its best to deal with the problem in a reasonable way? No. It should get credit for trying.

To be honest I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Aug 2024 ==

Did they actually though? I'm seriously concerned about immigration, however I was far from impressed by the previous government's "efforts" to tackle it. As I stated at the time on more than one occasion, it was largely empty and at times quite unpleasant rhetoric that did nothing to actually get the problem under control.

a) Brexit and b) Cleverly's measures last December are examples. The former in particular (and as I said above, I have no desire to get into another fruitless argument about Brexit) has had a huge effect in shutting people out from certain countries, though admittedly has had no effect on others.

What do you expect them to do? Tighten the rules still further so that it's all but impossible for anyone to emigrate to the UK unless they have very specialist, niche skills?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Aug 2024 ==

Quite right - genuine hate groups that advocate and encourage violence. Not groups of like minded people who may dislike the current quantity of immigration (for instance)


Not that you would always think so, with the attempts to conflate every individual or group who dislikes immigration levels and/or multi-culturalism with hate groups in order to discredit their view.

As others have said, has Starmer actually done this?

As far as I can see he is condemning the rioters and those that incite them only. Anything else just comes across to me as people finding an excuse to attack Starmer because they don't like him or his centrist politics.