A thread about protesters

[Metal Biker]

More gaslighting bullshit where you pretend you didn't say something you did.

Again, this is you not understandin the full context of what's been said. Anyone can pick and choose a sentence and give it a different meaning, like you constantly do.

Read the WHOLE post, in context and you should (doubtful, but I live in hope) be able to understand where you've misunderstood the point. Others understood it, why haven't you?

 

[domalino]

Again, this is you not understandin the full context of what's been said. Anyone can pick and choose a sentence and give it a different meaning, like you constantly do.

Read the WHOLE post, in context and you should (doubtful, but I live in hope) be able to understand where you've misunderstood the point. Others understood it, why haven't you?

I understand it perfectly well you think insulate britains climate change protest is not a genuine cause, unlike wages or poll tax.

That is what you've written. Those are your words.

If you meant something else you should write something else.

And if you think Climate change is a genuine cause then one bloke not insulating a house he doesn't own isn't relevant is it?

 

[Metal Biker]

I understand it perfectly well you think insulate britains climate change protest is not a genuine cause, unlike wages or poll tax.

That is what you've written. Those are your words.

If you meant something else you should write something else.

Wrong

No it wasn't what i've written. I'll make this easier for you, go through it step by step.

Please tell me you're not comparing these middle class ideologists with those genuine causes.

Most of them don't even practice what they preach and their own 'spokesperson' admitted they don't actually care about insulation. https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/09/insu...te-who-doesnt-care-about-insulation-15393293/

This was in reference to how those at Peterloo, who were assaulted by the Army, could be comparable to the 'suffering' of the Insulate Britain twats, who defied injunctions and then demanded they be sent to prison. Not comparable incidents, which was the point I was raising.

The next part adds more context to that point, about how the suffering of IB members being arrested is NOT comparable with how the Suffragettes and Peterloo Massacre victims suffered;

"I'm with you on the whole argument that the government cracking down on legal protests is a serious concern and needs addressing. A government free from criticism is as you say a step towards a totalitarian state, but this particular group being discussed are NOT the hill to die on in that respect. The Police haven't ridden in on horses and clattered them with batons, the Army hasn't opened fire on an unarmed crowd. They've been escorted off the road (via non-violent resistance) given a caution, went back and did the same thing, been escorted again, arrested, given an injunction to cease, ignored it, been arrested AGAIN, then in court demand TO THE JUDGE they be incarcerated because that is the only way they will stop doing what they're doing and then the judge granting them their wish. But #totalfascism apparently."

Read posts properly, and stop picking and choosing and taking comments out of context.

 

[Metal Biker]

I understand it perfectly well you think insulate britains climate change protest is not a genuine cause, unlike wages or poll tax.

That is what you've written. Those are your words.

If you meant something else you should write something else.

And if you think Climate change is a genuine cause then one bloke not insulating a house he doesn't own isn't relevant is it?

I don't need to "write something else".

You need to do a better job yourself at understanding what's been written. I can't dumb myself down for the likes of you. NB Rascal understood the point I made, hence the response he did was vastly different from yours. In the end, since he was the one I was repsonding to, that's all that matters. Not the ramblings of someone who overreacts.

 

[domalino]

Wrong

No it wasn't what i've written.

It is what you wrote though.

 

[domalino]

I don't need to "write something else".

You need to do a better job yourself at understanding what's been written. I can't dumb myself down for the likes of you. NB Rascal understood the point I made, hence the response he did was vastly different from yours.

@Rascal doesn't care about the stupid point you made because he doesn't care whether Climate change is a genuine cause, he thinks protest is a fundamental right regardless of the validity of the cause.

So you claiming it's not a genuine cause (your words) doesn't matter to him.

I on the other hand thinks it's hilarious you think the suffragettes can't be compared to middle class ideologists because that's exactly what they were. They literally didn't even want working class women to have the vote.

They also engaged in civil disobedience just like IB, outright breaking laws and, like IB getting sent to prison for it.

 

[Vic]

Protests? What protests?

The new ‘government by diktat’ bypasses parliament altogether | Financial Times (ft.com)

 

[inbetween]

Sorry to shi*house but based upon what's happening in London today, is this where we further defend protesters rights to break the law and protest illegally?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Sorry to shi*house but based upon what's happening in London today, is this where we further defend protesters rights to break the law and protest illegally?

They’ve probably got COVID from licking the roads.

 

[ganganvince]

Sorry to shi*house but based upon what's happening in London today, is this where we further defend protesters rights to break the law and protest illegally?

There's a few on here that will