Signs on the dole now
I'm sure some on here will sleep more easily at night now
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Signs on the dole now
Countries which Britain has interfered with, often prosecuting wars, or supplying weapons to those that do. What would you do, faced with living in such a country, fearing destitution or death, knowing that you spoke English and had been sold the vision that Britain was a very fair, honest and tolerant country?Funny how so many people the world over would risk their lives for the chance to live in this barbaric country.
It's no different from any other country that pursues its own interests. Predatory, not good.The UK is a force for good across the world and is respected for this reason. You call this propaganda!
It was bad. That you don't know that, or realise it, is due to it being completely removed from being taught in schools. No country invades other countries to have "helped these countries evolution and growth". What do you think Britain has been - The World Samaritan? You probably do. It's beyond laughable and I can only feel pity for you.The British Empire impacted on ways of life both good and bad and helped these countries evolution and growth. History is full of evil, and the UK backed out of its direct government in these countries a long time ago.
Force has altered the attitude of the country, not any conscious maturation or evolvement. Force. And it's always been the same for any country that colonised another. And Britain's has been longer than any other.The country has consciously matured and evolved over many years, this attitude leading to the safe diverse country that we are.
Maybe you would be happier if history had taken a different turn and we all talked German or Russian, because if we did ethnic minorities would not exist in the country and in their country of origin subservience to a master state would still be a thing.
Are we perfect ? No ! but we have given and continue to give the rest of the world standards of decency and democracy to follow.
Countries which Britain has interfered with, often prosecuting wars, or supplying weapons to those that do. What would you do, faced with living in such a country, fearing destitution or death, knowing that you spoke English and had been sold the vision that Britain was a very fair, honest and tolerant country?
It's no different from any other country that pursues its own interests. Predatory, not good.
It was bad. That you don't know that, or realise it, is due to it being completely removed from being taught in schools. No country invades other countries to have "helped these countries evolution and growth". What do you think Britain has been - The World Samaritan? You probably do. It's beyond laughable and I can only feel pity for you.
Britain was forcibly removed. You really need to look that up. There was no backing out, unless you call violence against repression, to be able to govern your own country, that!
Force has altered the attitude of the country, not any conscious maturation or evolvement. Force. And it's always been the same for any country that colonised another. And Britain's has been longer than any other.
It's still a safe country for white men, not black men. One was shot in the head in London a week ago, unarmed in a car. That doesn't happen to white men, does it?
Note that countries Britain invaded still speak their original languages and often have English as a second language, not a first. It exposes your nonsense about talking German or Russian, and is also shown in former Soviet countries not speaking Russian as a first language.
Ethnic minorities have been here a lot longer than you know, from at least Roman times. You need to brush up on your history, and that's putting it mildly. You need to learn some history.
1. Youve just given two examples of empires that used slavery. Nazi Germany used abundant slave labour. Danish empire did as well.That's supposed empires and dynasties, not slaving nations. Nazi Germany is in there. No one's thinking: "Yeah, those Nazi enslavers, we'll never forget that". No, they're thinking: "Holocaust, WW2 and fascism". It's like Colditz never happened, or The Great Escape (They shot them in the end. Sorry if you haven't seen it).
I note it lists the Danish Colonial Empire. Oh yes, the notorious Danish slavers. What did they do? A lot of bacon was involved. Some say blue cheese made an appearance. I can't say more than that.
The definition IS a little different, because it is untrue.
The first you seem to take as a credit, when it's actually the reverse. "Yes, we enslaved more people, stole from more people, oppressed more people, murdered more people, divided more people, than any other nation ever!. Round of applause for Britain."
I seriously hope you are not in the profession of law, as you sound like you would be an utter disaster for any client needing to be defended.
The second point has been roundly admonished and ridiculed, and I only repeat this. Britain was the major instigator and commercial operator of slavery on an industrial scale, by far the major profiteer. You may have recently realised they had built statues to commemorate these men, and then vociferously objected to their removal! No, keep the slaver statues and prosecute the people removing them!
Britain only abolished slavery from originating within its nation. You could still bring your slave to Britain and continue with your slavery. It wasn't banned in Britain's overseas territories. When slaves were freed (and then mostly had to continue in debenture) their owners were compensated and not the slaves! Largely, Britain used this "freeing of slaves" as a weapon to weaken competing nations, like Holland and Portugal, often stealing their cargo (i.e. people) and selling them on.
Lastly, the British government completely resisted abolishing slavery, using every tactic available to them, because many MPs profited from it. There is zero credit to Britain from "abolishing slavery". They are like the serial killer who pledges not to do any more serial killing!
He was in a car, which had been used in a fire arm incident only the day before, he was evading police, if he had nowt to hide why try and ram through police cars, another "rapper" living the life...Countries which Britain has interfered with, often prosecuting wars, or supplying weapons to those that do. What would you do, faced with living in such a country, fearing destitution or death, knowing that you spoke English and had been sold the vision that Britain was a very fair, honest and tolerant country?
It's no different from any other country that pursues its own interests. Predatory, not good.
It was bad. That you don't know that, or realise it, is due to it being completely removed from being taught in schools. No country invades other countries to have "helped these countries evolution and growth". What do you think Britain has been - The World Samaritan? You probably do. It's beyond laughable and I can only feel pity for you.
Britain was forcibly removed. You really need to look that up. There was no backing out, unless you call violence against repression, to be able to govern your own country, that!
Force has altered the attitude of the country, not any conscious maturation or evolvement. Force. And it's always been the same for any country that colonised another. And Britain's has been longer than any other.
It's still a safe country for white men, not black men. One was shot in the head in London a week ago, unarmed in a car. That doesn't happen to white men, does it?
Note that countries Britain invaded still speak their original languages and often have English as a second language, not a first. It exposes your nonsense about talking German or Russian, and is also shown in former Soviet countries not speaking Russian as a first language.
Ethnic minorities have been here a lot longer than you know, from at least Roman times. You need to brush up on your history, and that's putting it mildly. You need to learn some history.
He was in a car, which had been used in a fire arm incident only the day before, he was evading police, if he had nowt to hide why try and ram through police cars, another "rapper" living the life...
It wasn't the day before, he wasn't evading police, everyone has something to hide, he didn't ram through police cars, and he was hoping to start a career as an architect. Apart from that, you got everything right.He was in a car, which had been used in a fire arm incident only the day before, he was evading police, if he had nowt to hide why try and ram through police cars, another "rapper" living the life...
That's a constructive solution. Which one is most easily attainable? This one seems almost fucked so I imagine many will soon follow.You need to go live on another planet, because world history is ugly, we have played our part but I am happy and proud to be British today.
Not according to eye witness on sky news, even if it wasn't 1 day, there's firearms links with his car, if he even looks like he might reach for something, do you think an officer should hesitate and risk not going home to there family... easy to say otherwise afterwards when your not at risk....he shouldn't of put himself in that position.It wasn't the day before, he wasn't evading police, everyone has something to hide, he didn't ram through police cars, and he was hoping to start a career as an architect. Apart from that, you got everything right.
"A police car came down Kirkstall Gardens and crashed into him.
"Another police car came in behind him and they had him locked in at the bottom of Kirkstall Gardens.
"The car was immobile when he was shot. The bang was really loud." Streatham Hill: Man shot dead by police after pursuit
That's a constructive solution. Which one is most easily attainable? This one seems almost fucked so I imagine many will soon follow.
It was earlier mara.... he's a pig of a blokeIs this not about Trevor Sinclair?
I thought it was about which formation we're playing for the next matchIs this not about Trevor Sinclair?
1. They weren't built on slavery. You only need to find one instance to say: "Look, slavery!". Britain plainly used and profited from slavery on a massive and industrial scale, unprecedented in modern history. You know as much of the Danish Empire as I do, which is zilch.1. Youve just given two examples of empires that used slavery. Nazi Germany used abundant slave labour. Danish empire did as well.
2. Im sure the 30 million plus people in modern day slavery today take great comfort in knowing they arent really slaves.
3. I believe you are misunderstanding the word unique. It has neither positive or negative connotations just means it is one of its kind which it was in size and scale.
4. Evidence please that it was worst. Are you saying that based on emotion or fact. I certainly think it was one of the worst but genghis khan was supposed to have been responsible for circa 50 million murders as was Mao. There were 5 to 10 million slaves in the Roman Empire at any one time.
5. The second point has not been roundly admonished. There were plenty of opponents, it was eventually banished in the conies and it was driven largely by moral arguments. Zero credit for doing something unique in history.
Let's see that eye witness give a statement to any IOPC enquiry.Not according to eye witness on sky news, even if it wasn't 1 day, there's firearms links with his car, if he even looks like he might reach for something, do you think an officer should hesitate and risk not going home to there family... easy to say otherwise afterwards when your not at risk....he shouldn't of put himself in that position.
I might be an architect next week....
1. You say that the Danish Empire wasnt built on slavery then admit you dont know anything about it. So the fact then is that you dont know and you dont know about my knowledge either. Thats called guessing.1. They weren't built on slavery. You only need to find one instance to say: "Look, slavery!". Britain plainly used and profited from slavery on a massive and industrial scale, unprecedented in modern history. You know as much of the Danish Empire as I do, which is zilch.
2. You care as much about modern day slavery as you do about any historical slavery. For you, it's a distraction technique.
3. No, I fully understand it. You clearly used it to give it positive connotations.
4. I won't be doing the work for you. I am not your servant. You've got a keyboard, a computer and possibly at least half a brain, although Wikipedia is about your limit.
5. You don't get credit for starting the fires that burnt down buildings and killed people, and then eventually putting them out.
How do you know there was no threat, not his? Bombing about in a "pool" car was he? Making more sense now...1. They weren't built on slavery. You only need to find one instance to say: "Look, slavery!". Britain plainly used and profited from slavery on a massive and industrial scale, unprecedented in modern history. You know as much of the Danish Empire as I do, which is zilch.
2. You care as much about modern day slavery as you do about any historical slavery. For you, it's a distraction technique.
3. No, I fully understand it. You clearly used it to give it positive connotations.
4. I won't be doing the work for you. I am not your servant. You've got a keyboard, a computer and possibly at least half a brain, although Wikipedia is about your limit.
5. You don't get credit for starting the fires that burnt down buildings and killed people, and then eventually putting them out.
Let's see that eye witness give a statement to any IOPC enquiry.
It wasn't his car.
There was no suggestion he was reaching for anything, nor that any officer appeared to be in any danger. A firearms link with a car doesn't mean that you get shot in the head when immobilised in a car and not posing any danger to any officer.
1. I do know. You know as much of it as you know of quantum mechanics. That's called reading what has been written and understanding how it's been constructed. Here, there is less than meets the eye.1. You say that the Danish Empire wasnt built on slavery then admit you dont know anything about it. So the fact then is that you dont know and you dont know about my knowledge either. Thats called guessing.
2. I might as well say why dont you care more about the suffering of slaves today which you might be able to do something about than the past which is gone. I am more concerned about today than the past.
3. No, you dont know that. You think you know that. There is a difference.
4. You made the statement. You should be able to back them up. Youve already made multiple statements that have been demonstrated to be untrue. Throwing insults as well is not an argument its what someone does when they cant make arguments. Its not clever.
5. Thats your opinion. i have a different one when you stop a practice that has been endemic through human history and almost universal in all cultures.
You said you only need to find one instance to say: "Look, slavery! Nazi Germany enslaved 12 milion people into forced labour. Slavery was fundamental to its war effort. Your understanding is wrong.As I'm replying to an anonymous poster on a football forum, one who is obviously blustering about subjects he (or she) knows very little about
Your wasting your time mate.You said you only need to find one instance to say: "Look, slavery! Nazi Germany enslaved 12 milion people into forced labour. Slavery was fundamental to its war effort. Your understanding is wrong.
The Danish Empire was rife with slavery. They had colonies in the weat indies. Guess what happenend in those colonies. You were wrong.
Your statement that the British Empire was the worst for murder and slavery is also wrong.
Its probably not a good idea to make statements about other peoples grasps of truth and then make fundamental incorrect statements again and again and again.
I've got a suggestion for you. Rather than keep throwing insults and say you know what people know and mean when you dont, focus on your own statements first and try and make them accurate first.
I wonder what his other log ins are?Absolute joker this bloke @jrio and a racist / bad WUM to boot