Anything Political

[Stuart.C 491]

Agree with Letsavagoo, if something had have happened and serious injury or death occured there would be questions as to why the Met did nothing to stop it beforehand.

 

Uk viewing audience approx 20 million
World viewing audience up to 400 million

[Jill Sparrow 10,304]

2 hours ago, letsavagoo said:

My criticism of the police is it seems they have now apologised. Pathetic.

We have to apologise for everything these days, it seems, even if we didn't do it and weren't even in existence when it was done. 

[DJ360 6,721]

On 5/12/2023 at 4:14 PM, letsavagoo said:

I believe the coronation was an extraordinary event to police. The police had intelligence that the horses could be tear gassed or targeted the procession blocked and the proceedings seriously disrupted. I am not a royalist but we were on the world stage. Some may consider it was the correct time and place, indeed the ideal opportunity to protest but a few to spoil the enjoyment of thousands. I believe the police made the right call. My criticism of the police is it seems they have now apologised. Pathetic.

 

Firstly Letsav, I hope that you have overcome whatever it was that had you 'proper badly', but I really can't let your  above post go without comment.

 

'Tear Gas'.  Really?  Please post your source for that 'intelligence'

 

1. The Republic protesters had been in communication with the 'Met' for months before the event, had explained exactly how and where they intended to protest, including details of the size of flags, banners etc., the other equipment to be used and so on... They had received confirmation from the Met that their protest was lawful and would not be challenged.

I watched much of the 'Whatever' Committee hearing re: this on TV. The Police stonewalled, Govt. representatives blatantly lied and the only ones with any dignity and plausibility were the Republic leader, a prominent Human Rights Lawyer and the Chair. Naturally, the BBC reported a much less nuanced version of committee events less than an hour later.

 

2. Of course it was a difficult event to Police but as the Republic guy pointed out, the Coronation of a Monarch, even a 'Constitutional' one, is a HUGELY Political event, and any attempt to suppress lawful Political Protest around it is obviously anti democratic.

 

3. Several 'Nightstars' were arrested and held for hours the night before the Coronation. These are female volunteers who operate in London at night to assist and protect potentially vulnerable people. They operate with the approval and cooperation of both Westminster Council and the Met, among others. :

https://www.westminster.gov.uk/night-safety/night-stars

Nightstars carry, and are able to issue 'Rape Alarms', though the ones I heard speaking on TV denied ever having done so.  BUT, it seems that rumours that Rape Alarms were to be used to 'frighten the horses', were propagated by a Daily Mail 'journalist', who also just happens to be a former Met Officer...  Draw your own conclusions.

 

4. A woman was arrested and detained for 13 hours simply because she was unknowingly standing close to a bunch of 'Just Stop Oil' protesters.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/12/police-apologise-after-detaining-royal-superfan-for-13-hours-coronation-just-stop-oil?ref=upstract.com33

 

That was the THIRD example I know of..where entirely innocent people were arrested, wrongfully detained and at least seriously inconvenienced, by a Met Police Force which is at best incompetent and at worst, in the pay of an authoritarian anti democratic Govt.

 

And yet you find the Met apology 'shameful'? So if the Met shouldn't apologise when it is blatantly wrong.. when should it?

[DJ360 6,721]

On 5/12/2023 at 7:13 PM, Jill Sparrow said:

We have to apologise for everything these days, it seems, even if we didn't do it and weren't even in existence when it was done. 

 

Jill, that post is way below your usual standard. The Met Police did do it, and were in existence when it was done...so why should they not apologise?

[DJ360 6,721]

On 5/12/2023 at 4:53 PM, Stuart.C said:

Agree with Letsavagoo, if something had have happened and serious injury or death occured there would be questions as to why the Met did nothing to stop it beforehand.

 

Uk viewing audience approx 20 million
World viewing audience up to 400 million

 

So what you are saying is that Democratic Rights, the right to lawful protest etc.. are secondary to the reputation of the Met?

None of that excuses wrongful arrest, wrongful imprisonment, etc.  It simply highlights the incompetence (at least) of the Met.

 

Many years ago, I witnessed a Tory MP trying to justify the Death Sentence on TV.  When challenged with the propostion that a mistaken execution could not be rectified, he blathered on to the effect that 'surely the odd mistake is worthwhile if.. etc'  You are essentially making the same argument.

[DJ360 6,721]

On 5/6/2023 at 7:37 AM, PeverilPeril said:

DJ - ready your last post is so depressing and makes me think that voting at all is a complete waste of time. As it happens, the two independents that I voted for are well known local people that are trusted to deal with local issues.

 

 

PP, I was just pointing out the dangers of voting for 'any old' 'Independent', which is a message that was clearly lost on the good Burgers of my locale.  Of course voting isn't a waste of time. I just object to people who 'hide' behind an 'Independent' tag, when anyone who knows their motivation, knows that they are anything but.  As an example, I would consider standing as an Independent, but would be compelled by conscience to call myself  'Independent Social Democrat' or somesuch, so that people kew pretty much where I stood.

[DJ360 6,721]

On 5/4/2023 at 2:45 PM, letsavagoo said:

It’s just you can go on a bit. (Fact not dig, honest)

 

 

I actually think we agree, well almost. The problem is that you constantly post Tory failings but never highlight criticism of the opposition or other parties or if you have they pale into obscurity in the barrage of your anti Tory rhetoric. I’d just like to see a more balance view. 

 

Letsav. been meaning to come back on these few points...

Yes.. I think we are probably in closer agreement than our posts would indicate, but we still have our differences and it's up to us each to try to make our point.

 

As for me posting 'Tory failings', I make no apology.  I've tried several times to explain this but clearly I'm not explaining myself well enough... I'll try again...

 

For a start, I don't 'hate' Tory voters, or even most Tory politicians..I just sincerely believe they are misguided.  They constantly present us with the same old tripe, which mostly flies in the face of evidence...

Wage demands are inflationary, but huge salaries for bosses aren't.. Taxing the rich is bad for growth..investment...etc., but taxing the poor is 'necessary', to fund services.. Public Borrowing is bad..unless done by Tories..  And if we Plebs accept their argument....being poor for just a bit longer.. will make us better off...eventually, because..Jam Tomorrow ..and they 'have plans'.. they always claim 'plans',.. but never seem to enact them.

Really?

'Trickle down' and 'Levelling up'.. are bullshit.  They have never delivered and never will.  They are not intended to.  They are just marketing..

Next up.. I have, several times, drawn a clear distinction between 'Traditional' Conservatism, and the present bunch who present themselves as 'Conservatives'. I disagree with the 'Trad' lot because their whole approach trends toward policies which have been consistently proven to favour the already wealthy to the detriment of the rest. I vehemently hate the present lot because they have taken the 'Trad' conservatives into new realms of corruption, graft, theft and blatantly anti democratic ambition.  I'm concerned that you don't seem to see this.

 

I don't see it as my role to emphasise the failings of the opposition.  They are the opposition and therefore by definition are not responsible for current policy. I'll acknowledge their past failings... if real.. but mostly they aren't.

 

Finally, you claim I can 'go on a bit'.  I make no apology for that either...

Political arguments are by nature complex.  Anyone who presents you with a simple argument is usually wrong...

'Just leave the EU and it's Unicorns all the way!!'... That worked...

As H.L. Mencken correctly observed.. 'For every complex problem, there is a solution which is clear, simple.. and wrong.'..

When I was studying Political Theory at Uni, I was frequently required to examine some politically charged statement or other. The whole point was that such statements highlighted difficulties in the utopian theory presented by whoever.. Designing the 'ideal' society is difficult..if not impossible.., but we won't get there by clutching at simplistic straws.

[letsavagoo 961]

Hi Col.

Still not well but improving thanks.

 

I think it is important that I state again that the coronation was an extraordinary event. If it were not such a unique event my view would very likely be entirely different but then so would the police reaction too.

Can you for a moment consider the planning that must have gone into the security and safety of that operation. It will have been in planning for years and obviously with more urgency since the death of HM Queen Elizabeth II. The security of King Charles and the many distinguished guests and world leaders had to be considered. The safety and security of the huge crowds crammed into the streets are paramount and should a panic for whatever reason occur the potential for crush and death is real and probable. Think Hillsborough. 

All that to consider and plan for as well as dealing with the numerous groups that will seize the opportunity to protest. Not only the republican protesters but many others, some well known and other more fringe elements. Pro Palestine, Pro Israel, Just stop oil, trans rights etc etc. The list is endless.

The nature of protests have evolved over the years and as we have seen recently throwing paint and oil, chaining one’s self to street furniture and gluing hands to the road etc etc.

So an unprecedented event in difficult times with the potential for crush injury and death in hugely crowded streets.

The police and security services will have been gathering intelligence for months. Social media, informants, under cover agents and numerous other methods we don’t nor won’t know of. All intelligence is assessed, graded as unlikely from an untested source to highly probable from reliable known source. We don’t know nor never will fully know the information the police were in receipt of in relation to planned actions by some of the many groups that will cease the day to disrupt but I don’t envy those that were making decisions to ensure the safety of all those attending from the Royal family to world leaders and general public.

Taking your points as they are numbered.

 

1 . The official republican protesters on the face of it seem to have been dealt a raw deal having liaised best they could to then be taken out the game at the end.

I am sure the leaders were well intentioned and plausible but who knows what persons may have infiltrated their ranks. Maybe none but the police made the call to remove the risk. We just don’t know. There were a large number of republican demonstrators who were allowed to protest mainly near Trafalgar Square. Other protests also went ahead. You will not have seen these on the TV coverage.

 

2. The balance between allowing lawful protest and minimising the disruption, safety and inconvenience of the majority is a difficult one. The law is under review currently mainly due to the well known selfish idiocy of the just stop oil group. You will never satisfy all.

 

3. Several nightstars were arrested. Don’t know why but the police may or may not have had information of malicious intent by some. As I have stated this was a unique event and if a few people (I include the official republican protesters here) were inconvenienced then I’m struggling to shed a tear. Unfortunate for a few. 

 

4. A woman (just one) detained 13 hours for standing near just stop oil protesters. I did read the police response to this. They state that they acted in good faith given the circumstances that they were presented with at the time. I suspect there is a lot more to it this than we are hearing about but again, one person was inconvenienced in an event involving millions. Again I’m sorry for this woman but struggle to shed a tear.

 

This was the THIRD example (note the bold). You say the police were blatantly wrong. Without knowing the reasons they detained those they did. Given that the event went off without any major hitch or injury then the Met overall did a remarkable job. Were they ‘blatantly wrong’. I don’t think so. 

 

As to tear gas. I read it and cant find it again now but obtaining flares, guns and tear gas in the uk is not difficult if you know where to go. I do have some professional experience in this subject. Do not think for a second that such a possibility is wild speculation or fantasy. It is not.

 

Moving on you remark on Jill’s post re apology.

I haven't discussed it with her but believe she was not specifically referring to ‘this’ post but it was a more general comment. I must apologise for my being white and having white privilege and similar stupidity. The majority apologising to the tiny minority for whatever grievance perceived or not they have.

 

Your remark on Stuart C’s post.

I think you are missing the point here. Surely he is acknowledging the difficulty of the police operation. Can you imagine the fallout, not just on the Met but on the reputation and standing of this country on the world stage if a world leader in attendance had been injured or killed or the crowd were panicked and injuries and deaths occurred. A few people, a tiny minority, 0.000001% were inconvenienced for a few hours and couldn’t wave their flags and shout down with the King. The police so often in these situations are between a rock and a hard place. Some will be inconvenienced, some decisions will turn out to be wrong but overall they did a good job and to brand them incompetent is wrong. To not see that there’s a bigger picture here is naive and single minded

 

To reduce this down to the reputation of the Met and make comparison of Stuarts argument being something similar to the death penalty tory MP etc is just way off the mark it’s laughable.

 

Before I move on I stress that all my views are specifically tailored to this one extraordinary event and were it otherwise my views would not necessarily be the same. Democratic rights are important but time and place.

 

As to your reply to a previous post of mine. (Saturday 1.39pm)

I wont comment on most of it as its a view you express which is your right and so be it but I did nearly fall off my perch when you wrote…..

‘I don’t see it as my role to emphasise the failings of the opposition. They are the opposition

and therefore by definition are not responsible for current policy. I’ll acknowledge their past failings…..if real...but mostly they aren't.’

 

I didn’t study politics at university so wont make some eloquent quote from the American Mencken but rather that great American tennis player McEnroe. “You cannot be serious”.

 

Finally I hear that Starmers latest brain wave is to increase integration with Europe in other words a step to reverse Brexit, increase the number of immigrants and allow voting from other European countries.

All sound like vote winners to me.

Ps My vote in the Spanish by election seems to have got lost in the post.

[Beekay 5,134]

Well, just wanted to say 'thank you' Lets., for your informative post.

It filled my evening reading that lot and stopped me wasting time watching telly. Your keyboard must have verged on melting.

Cheers mate, take care. 

Your servant sir..

[Alpha 176]

Although it was promoted as a 'state' funeral, the so-called, family, should have footed the cost themselves. It is not as though they cannot afford it!

 

As an aside to the Windsor mafia, no doubt to boost their popularity, the inner circle of those mysterious courtiers have been using Kate (and family) at every publicity opportunity, presenting one's self as normal is grossly patronisingly and sickening. The difference between Kate and the overburdened working population is obvious.

 

The mandarins will stop at nothing and will use any opportunity to promote and raise the stature of this outdated society of this closed over privileged clan.  

 

 

 

[DJ360 6,721]

On 5/23/2023 at 10:20 AM, Alpha said:

The mandarins will stop at nothing and will use any opportunity to promote and raise the stature of this outdated society of this closed over privileged clan.

 

Difficult to disagree.  I'm sure Kate is a lovely girl, but the royal switch from ostentatious privelege  to 'just 'like us', is hard to swallow. Of course they are just like us, except that they live in a cocooned environment of privelege and wealth.

 

In discussions around the Coronation, some TV pundit came out with the blindingly obvious statement that "Charles had always had a strong relationship with 'The Military' " ..  Really? No s*** Sherlock!! ALL monarchy has  strong links with 'The Military', for the obvious reason that 'Kings' and 'Queens' of the past were simply the individuals who were able to seize power by virtue of having the biggest gang behind them and then set about inventing cobblers about 'Divine Right', 'chosen by God/ the Gods' etc.  If the Plantagenets and Tudors taught us nothing else, they taught that 'might is right'.

 

I do accept that our 'Constitutional' Monarchy is largely subject to the will of Parliament and until fairly recently I was pretty neutral about their role, but I'm starting to see them as a 'weapon', increasingly yet subtly used by the 'Establishment' to maintain the Status Quo, by perpetuating the idea that some people, simply by dint of birth, are entitled to more respect, privelege and protection, than others.

[DJ360 6,721]

On 5/22/2023 at 8:12 PM, letsavagoo said:

I think it is important that I state again that the coronation was an extraordinary event. If it were not such a unique event my view would very likely be entirely different but then so would the police reaction too.

Can you for a moment consider the planning that must have gone into the security and safety of that operation. It will have been in planning for years and obviously with more urgency since the death of HM Queen Elizabeth II. The security of King Charles and the many distinguished guests and world leaders had to be considered. The safety and security of the huge crowds crammed into the streets are paramount and should a panic for whatever reason occur the potential for crush and death is real and probable. Think Hillsborough. 

All that to consider and plan for as well as dealing with the numerous groups that will seize the opportunity to protest. Not only the republican protesters but many others, some well known and other more fringe elements. Pro Palestine, Pro Israel, Just stop oil, trans rights etc etc. The list is endless.

The nature of protests have evolved over the years and as we have seen recently throwing paint and oil, chaining one’s self to street furniture and gluing hands to the road etc etc.

So an unprecedented event in difficult times with the potential for crush injury and death in hugely crowded streets.

The police and security services will have been gathering intelligence for months. Social media, informants, under cover agents and numerous other methods we don’t nor won’t know of. All intelligence is assessed, graded as unlikely from an untested source to highly probable from reliable known source. We don’t know nor never will fully know the information the police were in receipt of in relation to planned actions by some of the many groups that will cease the day to disrupt but I don’t envy those that were making decisions to ensure the safety of all those attending from the Royal family to world leaders and general public.

 

Crikey Lets.!! You can go on a bit!

 

Of course we all understand the security issues around the Coronation, but not sure Hillsboro is a good example of the potential for disaster, unless you are looking for an example of Police incompetence, deliberately covered up.

 

It's pleasing that you seem willing to acknowledge that 'Republic' and others got a raw deal.  I'd go further and say Republic were deliberately targeted. They were clearly the most challenging to the idea of Monarchy, though they themselves are at pains to point out that they are not so much 'anti Monarchy', as 'Pro Republican' We need to step back here for a moment. The Law has already been changed, to outlaw 'locking on', such as chaining , glueing or otherwise fixing oneself to some immovable object. That was the crux of the issue with Republic and the Police. The Police decided that the luggage straps used to bundle dozens of banners together, could be used for 'locking on'.  At the subsequent Parliamentary Committee hearing, the Republic leader explained that not only were the luggage straps incapable of being locked, but that they were entirely unsuitable for 'locking on' and in any event, easily cut with scissors or a knife. The Senior Police Officer at the hearing did not challenge that.

 

On the other hand, I'm disappointed that you are 'struggling to shed a tear' for individuals who were clearly and falsely victimised by the Police.  However you try to minimise it, those people had their individual rights infringed, and that is not a matter which can be simply dismissed as 'only a few'. It is to do with the fundamental principles of our democracy. I contend that those principles are under attack from a far right Govt., which seeks to reduce the rights of the individual and to dangerously alter the power relationship between the Law.. which should protect us all equally, and Govt. which seeks to protect itself and its fellow travellers by overriding the Law. Once the Govt. also becomes the Law, we are sunk as a Democracy. You don't seem bothered by this.

 

From Conservative Manifesto 2019.  Read between the lines.  "After Brexit we also need to look at the broader aspects of our constitution: the relationship between the Government, Parliament and the courts; the functioning of the Royal Prerogative; the role of the House of Lords; and access to justice for ordinary people. The ability of our security services to defend us against terrorism and organised crime is critical. We will update the Human Rights Act and administrative law to ensure that there is a proper balance between the rights of individuals, our vital national security and effective government. We will ensure that judicial review is available to protect the rights of the individuals against an overbearing state, while ensuring that it is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays. In our first year we will set up a Constitution, Democracy & Rights Commission that will examine these issues in depth, and come up with proposals to restore trust in our institutions and in how our democracy operates." and "To support free speech, we will repeal section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2014, which seeks to coerce the press. We will not proceed with the second stage of the Leveson Inquiry."

 

That stuff is vague, but dangerous and mixes alleged concern for the individual, with a clear intention to alter the balance of power between Govt., Parliament and the Law. Such moves are frequently the first acts of Dictators and Totalitarian Governments.

 

I have to take Mrs Col to the Hospital now, , so I'll pick up on some other points later.

 

 

[letsavagoo 961]

Yes but I did say they got a raw deal on the face of it. 
Without knowing what if any information the police had I don’t think you can say they were clearly and falsely victimised by the Police. Why should you assume that there was no malignant element among their ranks. The event went off without any security or harm so the police operation was a success. It may well have done had the republican demonstrators that were detained were not so detained. 
I merely mentioned Hillsborough as an example that everyone is familiar with of people dying in situations where large crowds are gathered. In 2015 a crowd crush and stampede resulted in the death of 2000 individuals at the Hajj pilgrimage in Mina, Saudi Arabia and they managed that without any help from the British police.

I won’t go on. 

[letsavagoo 961]

It is very obvious that we are both entrenched in our respective views and I see no point and have no appetite to post further on this subject so I won’t.  

[DJ360 6,721]

That's your privelege Letsav, but from my perspective it's a pity.

I was enjoying the discussion which touched on important Democratic principles which I believe are under attack. And of course I flatter myself that others may be looking in... Whether they agree with you, me, both or neither of us is irrelevant. From my perspective, anything which gets people thinking about what is really happening in their name, is a 'good thing'.

 

I share people's concerns over thet tactics of some protestors, but from my perspective the Coronation was not only a genuine 'headache', for Police, but also an ideal opportunity for Govt. to 'trial' it's new anti-protest laws.

 

As I said, I had to break off replying to you to take Mrs Col to the hospital for an eye operation. A 'Blepharoplasty', which involved surgery to the inside of both eyelids. When I picked her up a few hours later she looked as if she'd gone several unsuccessful rounds with Mike Tyson and was in  lot of pain. 3 days on she still is.

 

I said I'd finish my reponse when I got back. It's up to you whether you see this as still 'this subject' and whether you want to respond.

 

I wanted to ask you outright whether or not you agree with me that the present Tory Party and Govt., is qualitatively different from previous Tory administrations. It's a proposition I've made previously, and which you have not responded to.

I contend that it is and I quoted a paragraph from their 2019 manifesto to illustrate my point. I saw that paragraph as a thinly disguised assault on our fundamental institutions.. Parliament and The Law, mixed up with vague references to individual access to justice, a rejection of the Leveson Enquiry recommendations etc. I saw much of it as Johnson seeking revenge against Parliament and The Law for not allowing him to ride roughshod over our cherished Democratic Institutions when in a Minority Govt. His successors are still at it.

 

I contend that the present Tory Govt. and much of the Party is unduly influenced by the Far Right., who are fundamentally undemocratic.

 

Just a few examples:

 

-Jacob Rees-Mogg's .'European Research Group' (ERG). The Brexit Lie Machine.

-'Institute of Economic Affairs'  based in Tufton St London. This lot are simply a front for extreme 'neo-Con players funded by Oil and Tobacco interests.

 

-More recently, the emergence of the 'National Conservatives', who are about as far right as it is possible to get without openly declaring yourself a Nazi:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/who-are-national-conservatives-and-what-do-they-want

 

Even their title abbreviates to 'NatC'.. Geddit?

 

-And then of course there are Govt. 'vetting rules', introduced I think by Rees-Mogg, which saw a World expert on Nerve Agents, 'disinvited' from a Govt. backed conference on 'Nerve Agents', because they rummaged through his Twitter account and found he'd been critical of Govt. in entirely different policy areas.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65675247

 

- Govt. move to hobble the independence of the Electoral Commission.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/while-you-werent-looking-the-tories-took-over-the-electoral-commission-320881/

 

-The current silence of a whole range of Far Right,  Racist, Xenophobic, Neo Nazi parties including the BNP, Britain First, National Front, Ukip/Reform or whatever they're called this week.. etc. Silent because the present Tories are acting for them.

 

 

I could go on at length and haven't even started on graft, corruption, theft etc.. but you get the picture.. Does this stuff worry you or not?

 

[DJ360 6,721]

Incidentally, does the stuff I outline above not worry anyone here?

[Jill Sparrow 10,304]

I don't worry about anything. Worry is pointless. It keeps you awake at night. It raises your blood pressure. It adversely affects your mental health. It, possibly, causes cancer. Worry is no good to anyone, so don't do it.  The world is not a fair place. It never has been and it never will be. Is it even meant to be? That bothers a lot of people. However, as I've mentioned before, I don't subscribe to the 'we are only here once' philosophy. I see it as many experiences over many lifetimes. Things even out that way. There are bills to pay and we all pay them. I watch my own actions and my own motivations. I can do nothing  about those of anyone else and it isn't my business to do so. I'm not dragging religion into the debate. I'm not a religious person. I just don't see the point of getting all steamed up about it.

[philmayfield 6,115]

‘Mental health’ as an excuse seems to be a fairly recent invention. When I was running a factory ‘bad back’ was the excuse for not turning up for work. Both are problems that cannot easily be verified by the medical profession. There are, of course, genuine cases but how are they identified? 

[Cliff Ton 10,457]

I don't see any point in getting worried.  You can find whatever you want to find if you think it's there, and you go looking for it.

 

It depends on your political/social views; something which worries one person is the sensible, obvious solution to someone else. 

[Jill Sparrow 10,304]

Some years ago, I worked with a woman who was a fairly senior manager. Nice enough person but she was obsessed by the possibility of war. Ten times a day she'd be heard asking people, "Do you think there'll be another war?"  Worrying about the possibility totally undermined her ability to do her job and resulted in huge amounts of sick leave.

 

She asked me her usual question one morning and I replied, quite honestly, that I didn't know but that if those in charge of the weapons decided to use them, there was nothing either she or I could do about it. This clearly upset her and I asked her what it was she was afraid of, exactly. Was she afraid of dying because she must surely realize that, in the words of Hamlet's mother, all that lives must die. The fact that she had been born guaranteed that one day her death would occur. It seemed to be a subject she had given little thought. The poor woman was just paralyzed by her obsession with the prospect of nuclear annihilation.  Goodness knows what she's doing these days, given the state of aggression on this planet.

 

I concluded   that the poor woman wasn't just terrified of death, she was also terrified of life. Spend your days  getting wound up about things you have no control over and your existence, along with that of those around you, is going to be bl**dy miserable.

[philmayfield 6,115]

Similar sorts of people used to be in institutions like Saxondale and Mapperley Hospital. Maybe many of them shouldn’t have been incarcerated but what about the others and where are they now that these institutions are no more?

[trogg 2,010]

If a problem  occurs you have 2 options either you can do something about it , so no need to worry or you cannot do anything about it so again no need to worry.

My friend has recently been diagnosed with Parkinson’s, he became fed up with people giving sympathy to him, now if anyone starts on that he tells them in no uncertain way no I don’t worry about it I have more chance of be killed by being knocked down by a bus and I don’t dwell on that. I think he has a great attitude.

[Jill Sparrow 10,304]

Your friend is very sensible, Trogg. Parkinson's is not a pleasant condition and, at present, there is neither a cure nor an explanation of what causes it, in most cases. Therefore, as they say, what cannot be cured must be endured. A metaphor for life, really. All things are temporary, thankfully.

[trogg 2,010]

Jill he does joke that when he had it diagnosed by his Consultant he was told it was to do with his brain, now he counters everyone at least he has had it confirmed by a specialist he has a brain have they.

[letsavagoo 961]

DJ.

I think the current government are terrible. It matters not to me whether they are qualitatively different from previous administrations as I have no faith whatsoever in them or in the opposition. As I have mentioned previously the expenses scandal totally shattered my faith and trust in MP’s, that’s all of them whatever their flavour. I see they still claim fixed penalty charges under travel expenses and false claims are still on the menu. I think Labour under Blair were terrible and Starmer is hopeless seeking pathetic gimmicks to curry favour his latest being he’ll stop oil drilling in the North Sea. Quoting the Guardian with its left wing bias doesn’t convince me of anything and how you claim with the current lack of action by the Tory’s, allowing illegal immigration on an industrial scale and doing absolutely zero about it makes them Racist, Xenophobic, Neo Nazis etc is a mystery. Quite the opposite I’d suggest.
We’ll never agree on protests but the current trend of throwing powders, paint and locking on is unacceptable. If the law needs changing to stop it them I am sure the vast majority of the public won’t see it as an ideal opportunity for Govt. to 'trial' it's new anti-protest laws but as common sense and not as you do as denying the democratic right to protest. I saw the coverage recently of the police detaining a driver who had pushed a protester out the road in order to move and earn a living. Seems like the police were actively protecting the protesters doesn’t it. How does that fit in with the anti protest theory. I know it shouldn’t but when you go on about ‘democratic right to protest’ it makes me think of the old sit com Citizen Smith’

I wonder how you would react if just stop oil had prevented Mrs DJ getting to hospital and I’m sorry to hear of Mrs Cols pains and hope she feels better soon.