Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Sept 19, 2010 10:55:05 GMT
`ang on a minute I was under the impression that politics and religion were taboo subjects!  Good point. Seems like one rule for some and another rule for others...
Its such fine lines at times and really we all know that Race Religion and Politics are subjects best avoided at all costs as they only ever cause issues and problems.Rags THERE IS NOT one rule for some and another rule for others. Aussies thread title on its own would have landed the TFF in very hot water as it would have been seen as promoting religious hatred. Politics maybe can be discussed on a forum, but we have seen on here how some start name calling etc because others hold different views, thats way its best avoided in my book. |
|
|
|
Post by aussie on Sept 19, 2010 10:58:05 GMT
Good point. Seems like one rule for some and another rule for others... Rags THERE IS NOT one rule for some and another rule for others. Aussies thread title on its own would have landed the TFF in very hot water as it would have been seen as promoting religious hatred. Politics maybe can be discussed on a forum, but we have seen on here how some start name calling etc because others hold different views, thats way its best avoided in my book. Dave has a good point my thread was rather stupid and unthinking! A bit like it`s author sometimes! |
|
chelstongull
TFF member
Posts: 6,759
Favourite Player: Jason Fowler
|
Post by chelstongull on Sept 19, 2010 11:25:35 GMT
 That would explain the "Dumpling Abusing Pultroon"  who started the thread and thence failed to contribute to it then! Is he up yet by the way, Cheers Merse, that bought a smile to my boat (as you Cockneys would say) I started this thread to keep Politics out of the excellent Train spotting thread and yes I've been up for hours!! I'm no expert in Politics, but have to say its turning into an interesting and educational thread. If I get time I will post about our excellent day out in Looe yesterday with lots and lots of photo's  |
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Sept 19, 2010 11:37:06 GMT
If I get time I will post about our excellent day out in Looe yesterday with lots and lots of photo's That'll be nice especially if you have one of a shark hung up by it's tail (Chris Roberts?) or a Grouper Fish (Willie Whitelaw lookalike) Remember what Maggie said: "Every Prime Minister needs a Willie"  |
|
Rags
TFF member
Posts: 1,210
|
Post by Rags on Sept 19, 2010 12:15:02 GMT
Rags THERE IS NOT one rule for some and another rule for others. Aussies thread title on its own would have landed the TFF in very hot water as it would have been seen as promoting religious hatred. Politics maybe can be discussed on a forum, but we have seen on here how some start name calling etc because others hold different views, thats way its best avoided in my book. Good, just checking... I can't find the thread but I was convinced that Aussie was steered away from the subject of religion because it, along with race and politics it was considered a subject that was too controversial to sit happily on this forum. So when a thread was started specifically about Margaret Thatcher and the post starter didn't appear to be subject of the same constraints as Aussie, I began to wonder if I had got it wrong. So I am delighted to be assured that I was mistaken and there is no censure on intelligent debate about any subject. Which doesn't change my thought that religion and some areas of politics are too deeply inground to be altered by any form of debate. |
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Sept 19, 2010 12:26:06 GMT
I can't find the thread but I was convinced that Aussie was steered away from the subject of religion because it, along with race and politics it was considered a subject that was too controversial to sit happily on this forum. . Not a case of not sitting happily on the forum Rags, I will sent your a PM explaining the reasons the thread had to be removed. |
|
Dave
TFF member
Posts: 13,081
|
Post by Dave on Sept 19, 2010 14:18:51 GMT
Merse I never said no one was not allowed to strike as you well know, what I did say was I felt no one body should have the power to bring the country down on its knees, I said I felt it was wrong when those who are enjoying better pay and conditions than so many others can take action that prevent those who maybe are low paid and after finishing work in their full time job then start work in the their part time job to be able to save up enough money to have one good holiday a year from taking that holiday they do deserve.
I said I felt it was wrong that some could take action that stopped others going to work and earning their own living just because they wanted even better pay and conditions.
We all have the right to withdraw our labour if we so choose but its never as simple as that is it? I could phone my boss today If I wanted too and tell him I’m not working for him anymore and where would that leave me and Carol? Well without young children in a very sticky situation that’s where as Carol’s friend has just found out after having to give up work due to poor health and while having her rent and rates paid is expected to live on just £80 per a WEEK.
I have had to make my feelings know to my boss on occasions how I feel about being the one member of staff that works longer hours than everyone else and the only one working for free for at least five hours a week and it goes against what I believe and that is if someone is good enough to do the work they are good enough to get paid for it.
But in life you have to look at the whole picture and you own situations and at my age I’m happy to still have a job and the big plus in my job is I’m left alone to get on with it and have no interference from my boss as he trusts me to do what I’m required to do and that alone is worth so much to me. If I want to go and shop in PC World in Yeovil lets say, then I can do that and if I want to stop and take a picture of a pub for a thread on the forum I can do that as well and sometimes just having the sense of freedom while being employed is a wonderful feeling to have.
When I became a milkman when I was a young man I had to join a union and I agreed with the idea if you wanted the benefit of pay rises the union won for its member then you should belong to it. I don’t agree with what Lambeth said however, as if I felt it was wrong to strike as the demands being made were wrong, then I would stand up and say so and would not go out on strike as to do so would mean I would not be being true to what I believed.
Holding companies to ransom by strike action is wrong as far as I’m concerned and at the end of the day if you no longer like you pay and conditions then you can leave the job as there are plenty of people more than happy to even have a job let alone one that pays a good wage and has a shorter working week.
Its sad how things have turned out for you Merse as far as work is concerned, but you have as good as said on here recently you won’t be working again until you find a job that pays you more than you are now getting on benefits and sorry I think that’s why there are so many problems in the UK when people end up better off staying at home and not going to work like most other people have too.
Your situation would be so different if you did not have young children and would soon be looking to take any job going as you would not be getting very much in benefits and would end up in the same situation I would if I made that phone call to my boss this afternoon. The thing is I don’t feel trapped or in a situation that’s somehow bad, I simply have looked at the whole picture and know I’m still a lot better off than so many others right now and so am happy to make allowances at this time knowing by doing so I play some part in ensuring I still have a job to go to tomorrow.
|
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Sept 19, 2010 15:54:58 GMT
Merse I never said no one was not allowed to strike as you well know, what I did say was I felt no one body should have the power to bring the country down on its knees, I appreciate where your coming from Dave, but what you say about stopping others from getting to work cannot be the catalyst for bringing in Fascist measures to take away THOSE individuals who work in your hand picked occupations the right to withdraw their labour. Whoever refuses to work it doesn't matter, you can't have one law for one citizen and one for another. I agree that people shouldn't be able to stay at home for the same nett financial result by drawing benefit as working...................so up those bloody piss taking wages then! I think your attitude to work is superb and I suspect that your employer is taking the piss because of it. I don't think that reflects on you in any way, but it sure as hell does on him. Workers like you who show a conscientious and diligent manner should be rewarded not taken for granted and taken advantage of and are the living epitome as to why trade unions are needed in some companies. I agree that where companies are honourable and respectful of employees the need isn't so great but unfortunately that isn't the case is it as you well know. ..................and please don't trot out this "the country's in a mess" sob story. The country was in a mess after the Second World War and public investment was the catalyst for re-generation and towards full employment. Now it is in a mess through no fault of the country's workforce save the "investment" banks, this government want to cut public investment and desecrate public services. They want to continue allowing the bankers their bonuses despite the £23,000 billion they have pumped into the private banking industry to prop it up. They want to continue war mongering in the style of Thatcher and B Liar with all the terrible cost of human misery and financial ruin that accompanies it. Rob stated on here earlier that the Falklands War had given this country back it's self respect........................you're a bloody lunatic saying that; what the feck did THAT achieve save divert attention away from a bunch of senile old reactionaries waging class war on their own people? We went to war with Argentina over a wind blown piece of rock in the South Atlantic? Winston Churchill must have been laughing in his grave ~ we'd have been better off going to war with the moon for daring to "go out" once a month! |
|
|
|
Post by stefano on Sept 19, 2010 16:03:31 GMT
Merse I never said no one was not allowed to strike as you well know, what I did say was I felt no one body should have the power to bring the country down on its knees, Whoever refuses to work it doesn't matter, you can't have one law for one citizen and one for another. We have. There are occupations where it is an offence to go on strike and the penalty is imprisonment. |
|
merse
TFF member
Posts: 2,684
|
Post by merse on Sept 19, 2010 16:07:53 GMT
We have. There are occupations where it is an offence to go on strike and the penalty is imprisonment. I know, you were in one.................a pity it doesn't apply to the "desertion" as seen around here by Old Bill since we had gunshots outside the other day! |
|
|
|
Post by stefano on Sept 19, 2010 16:12:07 GMT
We have. There are occupations where it is an offence to go on strike and the penalty is imprisonment. I know, you were in one.................a pity it doesn't apply to the "desertion" as seen around here by Old Bill since we had gunshots outside the other day! Yes it does seem to be that the more money pumped in and the greater the numbers the less the visibility |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2010 5:09:45 GMT
Rob stated on here earlier that the Falklands War had given this country back it's self respect........................you're a bloody lunatic saying that; what the feck did THAT achieve save divert attention away from a bunch of senile old reactionaries waging class war on their own people? We went to war with Argentina over a wind blown piece of rock in the South Atlantic? Winston Churchill must have been laughing in his grave ~ we'd have been better off going to war with the moon for daring to "go out" once a month! I find that pretty bloody offensive actually, as someone who was heavily involved in the Falkland's war and gave 26 years service to the Queen. I'm not looking for praise or any of that 'thanks' bollocks, as I did so willingly, of my own volition, and got well paid for it in return. Unfortunately my patriotism and wish to serve my country also benefits ungrateful, self-centered, opinionated blokes like you, who take for granted their right to free speech and the security that allows you to sleep easily in your bed. And actually it was Churchill that said 'The reason people can sleep easily in their beds is because rough men are prepared to do violence on their behalf'. It is pure conjecture whether he would have sent a task force but I believe he would have. Whatever you believe Maggie's ulterior motive(s) may have been, the fact is the Falkland Islands' population, as citizens of a British Protectorate, were invaded and held against their will by another sovereign country. It was quite right that we should exert our right to defend our territory and send a task force to liberate the Falkland islanders. You are old enough to remember the wave of patriotism that swept this country at the time, which does not bear out your accustaion that Rob is 'a bloody lunatic'. Extrapolating your argument means, in effect, that the French, for example, could nip over to the Isle of Wight, plant their flag, impose their laws and language, and we should do nothing about it. I think fecking not. |
|
|
|
Post by stefano on Sept 25, 2010 6:21:35 GMT
Rob stated on here earlier that the Falklands War had given this country back it's self respect........................you're a bloody lunatic saying that; what the feck did THAT achieve save divert attention away from a bunch of senile old reactionaries waging class war on their own people? We went to war with Argentina over a wind blown piece of rock in the South Atlantic? Winston Churchill must have been laughing in his grave ~ we'd have been better off going to war with the moon for daring to "go out" once a month! It is pure conjecture whether he would have sent a task force but I believe he would have. ........Extrapolating your argument means, in effect, that the French, for example, could nip over to the Isle of Wight, plant their flag, impose their laws and language, and we should do nothing about it. Churchill would have been on the bridge of the first ship out of Portsmouth scanning the horizon with his binoculars ... echoes of the siege of Sidney Street in 1911 when armed Russian anarchists were holed up in a house and the then Home Secretary Churchill not only turned up at the scene but wanted to tackle the gunmen himself! Not sure about the Isle of Wight though. Let the French have it ... and Cornwall! |
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,232 
|
Post by rjdgull on Sept 25, 2010 7:24:52 GMT
Rob stated on here earlier that the Falklands War had given this country back it's self respect........................you're a bloody lunatic saying that; what the feck did THAT achieve save divert attention away from a bunch of senile old reactionaries waging class war on their own people? We went to war with Argentina over a wind blown piece of rock in the South Atlantic? Winston Churchill must have been laughing in his grave ~ we'd have been better off going to war with the moon for daring to "go out" once a month! I find that pretty bloody offensive actually, as someone who was heavily involved in the Falkland's war and gave 26 years service to the Queen. I'm not looking for praise or any of that 'thanks' bollocks, as I did so willingly, of my own volition, and got well paid for it in return. Unfortunately my patriotism and wish to serve my country also benefits ungrateful, self-centered, opinionated blokes like you, who take for granted their right to free speech and the security that allows you to sleep easily in your bed. And actually it was Churchill that said 'The reason people can sleep easily in their beds is because rough men are prepared to do violence on their behalf'. It is pure conjecture whether he would have sent a task force but I believe he would have. Whatever you believe Maggie's ulterior motive(s) may have been, the fact is the Falkland Islands' population, as citizens of a British Protectorate, were invaded and held against their will by another sovereign country. It was quite right that we should exert our right to defend our territory and send a task force to liberate the Falkland islanders. You are old enough to remember the wave of patriotism that swept this country at the time, which does not bear out your accustaion that Rob is 'a bloody lunatic'. Extrapolating your argument means, in effect, that the French, for example, could nip over to the Isle of Wight, plant their flag, impose their laws and language, and we should do nothing about it. I think fecking not. I missed those kind comments Merse and obviously have to disagree with you if only for the sake of my sanity. It is the first duty of any country to protect its citizens and our standing in the world would have plummeted from the "loss of face." Politicians have spoken of a new respect they received after this conflict when negotiating abroad. Militarily it was a supreme effort to get the task force there in the first place and then defend it from a land based adversary. Our soldiers as usual performed heroically and often reversed the maxim of an attacking force needing a 3:1 ratio to persevere, Goose Green being a case in point. It wasn't only conscripts either as the Argentines had a regiment of Marines stationed on the outskirts of Port Stanley but even with numbers and in well dug in positions they were smashed and pushed back to retreat in disarray. This after one heck of a romp across an inhospitable environment carrying full battle gear. Tough and brave men and woman indeed and I salute every one in that task force. I was only nine at the time so my experiences may have been coloured but I seem to recall a wave of euphoria around the country at the time. Of course it had political benefits for the tories but maybe the democratic mandate for this conflict should be compared to the Iraq war which still hangs like a millstone around the neck of the Labour party. |
|
|
|
Post by aussie on Sept 25, 2010 8:22:58 GMT
Isn`t there oil near the Falklands? Just like Iraq being next to Q8, the invasion of Iraq was purely not at all down to oil was it? Most of these conflicts are about money (oil, diamonds, land)!
|
|
who started the thread and thence failed to contribute to it then! Is he up yet by the way,
