• Current Donation Goals

CFCnet Admin

Media / Press

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Jasonb said:

And there is no guarantee normal people stop for pollsters, 

I'm not sure that is a problem.  Most polls are within there own estimated error range.  The exceptions are when there popular media starts casting aspersions.  That is when people cover up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the idea that this BLM, and other movements for that matter, have some people with shady/selfish/self serving interests behind it. But why focus so much on that when you can focus on a lot of other elements that are quite positive. A very basic principle in life is that if you see something evil, try to change it with your hand, if not your tongue, if not then with your thoughts. People are standing up to evil, and that is good. To ask why this evil and not other evils is really an unnecessary exercise. At least some people have picked something to stand up for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29.6.2020 at 0:11 PM, Jasonb said:

I read a US article a couple of days ago and it resonated.

It said the BLM movement has worked in Trump's favour and not because they like Trump more because they like disorder.

The images that the silent majority have seen on their TV screens is shocking and the silent majority will vote and they will not vote for continued disorder. He said just like with the last US election and just like with Brexit, the pollsters have it wrong.

 

 

 

These issues are really to complex and intricate for anyone to claim how they will effect other elements in society. I for one believe that real change comes from the roots up, and not the other way around. There is movement in the roots, no doubt about that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ibn Battuta said:

I get the idea that this BLM, and other movements for that matter, have some people with shady/selfish/self serving interests behind it. But why focus so much on that when you can focus on a lot of other elements that are quite positive. A very basic principle in life is that if you see something evil, try to change it with your hand, if not your tongue, if not then with your thoughts. People are standing up to evil, and that is good. To ask why this evil and not other evils is really an unnecessary exercise. At least some people have picked something to stand up for. 

A bunch of comments.  BLM per se is a small group affiliated to Movement for Black Lives.  M4BL is a much bigger organisation which back in 2016 was awarded $100m of financing form a group lead by the Ford Foundation.  BLM itself is pretty much just the slogan and twitter hash.
There are interests behind it, some dark, some simply political (no shame in that).  There are also many who simply want to use it as the next Resistance vehicle for bringing down Trump (which is essentially treason and very wrong).
Very little of this is working against inequality and very little is ideologically consistent.
I don't see BLM as standing up to evil as it misses 99% of the evil in the world and even 95% of the evil done to black Americans (drug laws, gun laws, and the widening inequality between all rich and all poor - and poor upward mobility for both blacks and whites) .

1 hour ago, Ibn Battuta said:

These issues are really to complex and intricate for anyone to claim how they will effect other elements in society. I for one believe that real change comes from the roots up, and not the other way around. There is movement in the roots, no doubt about that. 

No - if you take the anger and direct it to pointless issues - like paranoid police being scared they might be arresting someone on a third strike facing 25 years - you lose the opportunity.  Some would say that that is the whole point of BLM getting so much coverage.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JaneB   
3 hours ago, Ibn Battuta said:

I get the idea that this BLM, and other movements for that matter, have some people with shady/selfish/self serving interests behind it. But why focus so much on that when you can focus on a lot of other elements that are quite positive. A very basic principle in life is that if you see something evil, try to change it with your hand, if not your tongue, if not then with your thoughts. People are standing up to evil, and that is good. To ask why this evil and not other evils is really an unnecessary exercise. At least some people have picked something to stand up for. 

Indeed, but they are pushing their agendas onto everybody else.

Everyone would agree that racism is wrong but not everyone agrees with the methods used to confront this and they are perfectly entitled to exercise that right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ham   
6 hours ago, JaneB said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8473931/Sky-Sports-pundit-Matt-Le-Tissier-says-review-wearing-Black-Lives-Matter-badge.html

At last someone in the public eye with balls (pardon the pun)

Good intentions maybe but not thought through.  

All these pundits look ridiculous with their badges on.  And what will they be forced to wear next season?

Yes and Karl Henry (mentioned in this piece) has been the voice of reason throughout and this began with him openly criticising Saint Gary Lineker for rampant hypocrisy when he applauded the behaviour of BLM protesters for two solid weekends, ignoring appalling anarchic behaviour by a sizeable group, whilst immediately criticising the football fans alliance group the following week for equally unacceptable behaviour.  Again he ignored the fact that a number of the football fans were almost killed in swarm attacks. Only the actions of the Police and on one occasion, a heroic black guy saved their lives.

Incredibly, it's on the innocuous sounding tiktok platform that you'll see the very worst of what happens, unedited, that is not being reported on any other mainstream media or social media outlet. It's very disturbing.

Karl has openly challenged the methods and ambitions of BLM throughout and this has resulted in him being criticised by black people.  I haven't scoured his social media but I'd be very surprised if he hadn't been called an Uncle Tom for his efforts.

6 hours ago, Jasonb said:

And there is no guarantee normal people stop for pollsters, after having been stopped a couple times about a decade ago by chuggers I started giving them a wide berth. I suspect similar with pollsters.

It reminds me  also of the more you find out about charities the more you realise this is often less about helping your local environment and more about funneling funds to needy groups abroad. Now this may be a good thing to do yet it is false marketing.

 

Exit polls are pointless these days as it's well known that Conservative voters are far less likely to answer than the vocal minority of left wing voters.

In future that'll be even more obvious with anyone who's not left of centre or pro-EU being labelled a racist.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ham said:

Incredibly, it's on the innocuous sounding tiktok platform that you'll see the very worst of what happens, unedited, that is not being reported on any other mainstream media or social media outlet. It's very disturbing.

Always the way.  It is not difficult to find out what happened in HK or still happens at Gilet Jaunes protests, indeed the pictures and videos that accompany stories often disprove the headlines.

7 hours ago, JaneB said:

At last someone in the public eye with balls (pardon the pun)

I think Le Tiss was juggling too many and dropped one.  He responded to tweets and ended up revealing a position I think he would have preferred not to have mentioned.  He is now very much in a lose/lose position when he next appears on TV.  If he had ever been a manager he'd know enough to never answer direct questions.  
He has my sympathies.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Ham said:

Yes and Karl Henry (mentioned in this piece) has been the voice of reason throughout ...

Reasonable in tone, yes. 'Voice of reason', suppose that depends on how closely his and your voice say the same things.

Catching up on it, it does seem that Henry knows more about what BLM as an organisation stands for than many other footballers and those involved in the game, who are perhaps playing catch up and only just realising what views they may have aligned themselves with. Fair play to him on that. 

There is a bigger discussion/debate to be had about precisely how it is you support the idea 'black lives matter' (I.e. as a belief or movement rather than the organisation) if you are opposed to the political and social status quo being at all disrupted (I.e. as organisations such as but not limited to BLM aspires to) ... But probably too big and contentious a discussion to be had here, and one I'm not sure I have the energy for given I think I have different politics to most here. I don't think you'd have to be pro-BLM specifically, but do think you'd have to back some pretty significant, disruptive and likely uncomfortable changes. 

Much of the discussion reminds me of some of my thoughts around the Terry/Ferdinand incident, and especially how the likes of The Mail and The Sun reported it. I think we're too caught up with the idea that being racist makes you a bad person. I mean, it might; you might consciously delight into your hatred. More likely though your thoughts, beliefs, behaviours are not ill-intentioned, but the partial products of the world around you. Too many of us can't hear when we've been racist, because we think that makes us a bad person, and the idea that we're a bad person just isn't tolerable. The way those newspapers othered Terry as a terrible person while themselves peddling racism is all part of that. I've certainly been racist. I didn't like hearing it, but it was true.

Just as my own musing, I find the 'defund police' thing interesting. It's been lifted directly from the US organisation/movement where it is incredibly relevant but frankly does not travel well in my view. US police forces are, to my mind, terrifyingly militarised and omnipresent. They are literally given military surplus weaponry; it sounds like dystopia fiction but it is not uncommon for school-based officers to be armed as if they have been deployed in downtown Basra. In the UK I think the issue is much more that our police are asked to undertake far too many non-law enforcement activities that they are poorly equipped and trained for, and where really better results would be achieved by greater funding to different services (e.g. police often acting as the first line of mental health intervention).

Edit: phone keeps changing 'defund' to 'defend' ... Really not the same thing!

Edited by thevelourfog
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thevelourfog said:

Reasonable in tone, yes. 'Voice of reason', suppose that depends on how closely his and your voice say the same things.

Catching up on it, it does seem that Henry knows more about what BLM as an organisation stands for than many other footballers and those involved in the game, who are perhaps playing catch up and only just realising what views they may have aligned themselves with. Fair play to him on that. 

There is a bigger discussion/debate to be had about precisely how it is you support the idea 'black lives matter' (I.e. as a belief or movement rather than the organisation) if you are opposed to the political and social status quo being at all disrupted (I.e. as organisations such as but not limited to BLM aspires to) ... But probably too big and contentious a discussion to be had here, and one I'm not sure I have the energy for given I think I have different politics to most here. I don't think you'd have to be pro-BLM specifically, but do think you'd have to back some pretty significant, disruptive and likely uncomfortable changes. 

Much of the discussion reminds me of some of my thoughts around the Terry/Ferdinand incident, and especially how the likes of The Mail and The Sun reported it. I think we're too caught up with the idea that being racist makes you a bad person. I mean, it might; you might consciously delight into your hatred. More likely though your thoughts, beliefs, behaviours are not ill-intentioned, but the partial products of the world around you. Too many of us can't hear when we've been racist, because we think that makes us a bad person, and the idea that we're a bad person just isn't tolerable. The way those newspapers othered Terry as a terrible person while themselves peddling racism is all part of that. I've certainly been racist. I didn't like hearing it, but it was true.

Just as my own musing, I find the 'defund police' thing interesting. It's been lifted directly from the US organisation/movement where it is incredibly relevant but frankly does not travel well in my view. US police forces are, to my mind, terrifyingly militarised and omnipresent. They are literally given military surplus weaponry; it sounds like dystopia fiction but it is not uncommon for school-based officers to be armed as if they have been deployed in downtown Basra. In the UK I think the issue is much more that our police are asked to undertake far too many non-law enforcement activities that they are poorly equipped and trained for, and where really better results would be achieved by greater funding to different services (e.g. police often acting as the first line of mental health intervention).

Edit: phone keeps changing 'defund' to 'defend' ... Really not the same thing!

Surely you’d know when you’ve actually been racist and not only racist according to radical leftists. I’m a minority myself (Middle Eastern heritage) and I’m appalled by how some of the radical left is behaving. I don’t want them on my side, cause they are doing a lot more harm than good. 

Secondly, it’s not a relevant discussion to defund the US police. Quite the contrary actually. The reason they are more heavily armed then the UK police should be self-explanatory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The_Ghost said:

Surely you’d know when you’ve actually been racist and not only racist according to radical leftists. I’m a minority myself (Middle Eastern heritage) and I’m appalled by how some of the radical left is behaving. I don’t want them on my side, cause they are doing a lot more harm than good. 

Secondly, it’s not a relevant discussion to defund the US police. Quite the contrary actually. The reason they are more heavily armed then the UK police should be self-explanatory. 

Happened to be browsing, wasn't waiting for a response to pounce.

Your first paragraph ... I guess some times you'd know. But then even plenty of people who are very openly, unambiguously racist will tell you they're not because they understand, mindfully or otherwise, the baggage that comes with it as a label. I remember watching a documentary following a self-styled 'modern' KKK grand wizard in his day to day years ago. He was convinced he and the KKK weren't racist because he enjoyed "black cooking". And I don't think we always 'know' in a very mindful, conscious and immediate way why it is we think and behave the way we do; pretty much all neurological research would suggest we very rarely, if in fact ever, do. As for what impact are actions have had on others ... Also not necessarily an easy thing to know. So no, I don't think it's a certainty you'd know. I also don't think that view is an especially left-leaning one; it could easily lend itself to traditionally right-leaning ways of organising government, society etc.

Second point, disagreed. Not at all obvious to me why a domestic police force needs military grade armoury. I don't envisage either of us changing the other's mind on this point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now