Current Affairs

[Mervyn and Trish]

Let's see what happens in half an hour. Van Tam or Harries might appear and we can all give a sigh of relief that they haven't been banished!

Not Van Tam, but one of the others (Chief Nurse) has seemingly been dropped for refusing to support Cummings. If the report is correct, we weren't far wrong: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 62741.html

It might be fake news of course Annie, there's lots of it about.

The good old Independent. Never has a newspaper been so misnamed. Just look who owns it. I'll let you look it up.

[screwy]

Would rather trust Murdochs rags and thats pushing it.

[Gill W]

Let's see what happens in half an hour. Van Tam or Harries might appear and we can all give a sigh of relief that they haven't been banished!

Not Van Tam, but one of the others (Chief Nurse) has seemingly been dropped for refusing to support Cummings. If the report is correct, we weren't far wrong: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 62741.html

That report seems entirely feasible to me, as the Chief Nurse has mysteriously disappeared too.

I think, how it will work now is that Johnson will do the briefings on Wednesday (it's his day at work as he is obligated to do PMQs), and they will wheel out Whitty and Vallence, as they have not openly spoken out against Cummings. They weren't allowed to, as Johnson jumped in before they could answer the question! The rest of the week, the minister's sidekicks will be non scientist types.

I think Cummings has an iron grip on 10 Downing Street, and he controls everything. I don't actively watch the briefings anymore, as they are little more than propaganda. I just have the TV on in the background just in case something new is said, like 'support bubbles' the other day!

[Gill W]

You do seem determined to disagree with me at any cost! Prior to whatever date the law did not allow women to vote. Once the law changed they were permitted to vote whether men liked it or not. There is not a law today that declares black people inferior to white and allows policemen to kill them.

I could say the same about you!

In order to get to the point where the law was changed, women had to push and campaign for years. If they hadn’t have done that, women would not have been granted the vote in 1918 and rest in 1928. It was hard fought, to overcome prejudices. If the women hadn’t campaigned, I doubt if the men of parliament would ever have thought to allow women to vote - there would have been no pressure for change.

I wasn’t talking about laws, I was talking about societal attitudes.

Right. One last go then I'm out and you can have the last word.

I am not arguing with you. I agree women had to campaign for years to get the vote. And that some men resisted it. It was scandalous. Can I possibly make that any clearer?

But I am talking about the law as well as societal attitudes. I believe in polite conversation all parties have a right to raise other topics rather than follow one person's agenda.

The point I am seemingly failing to get across is this. Once those women had won the battle the law, which had previously discriminated against them was changed. They got the vote. It didn't matter whether some men continued to resent it. The job was done. The end.

Contrast with, we currently have laws that outlaw discrimination and policemen killing people. Both are already illegal. Protests are not needed to achieve that. What happened in the US is illegal and is being enforced. Those cops have been arrested and charged. So what is the point of protesting now? What do the demonstrators hope to achieve? Unlike the women of the early twentieth century they have no law to fight to change. It is already there. All that is left is the entrenched attitude of individuals and no amount of new legislation or demonstrating will change that. In fact, as in many cases, extremists for any cause actually damage it by alienating those who actually support them. Most of us believe black lives matter. We don't need a riot, people hurt and property damaged to tell us. Thick committed racists will not be moved in their attitude by chucking a statue in the river and will be revelling in scenes that serve to confirm their prejudices.

I'm not arguing with you either.

You seem to see this as just about a point of law. That's ok

All I'm trying to say is that protests are normally about trying to change something - whether it's trying to stop something that's happening, or trying to get something new started. It may or may not involve a law change. Change is the key point for me not law.

The killing of George Floyd has been a catalyst, Throughout the world, everyone is now talking about racism both now and in the past. We are learning - I don't know about you, but I've learnt a lot about the slave trade in the last week. We are also learning about the present day, and listening to black people talk about their experiences of racism right now.

I assume the demonstrators want to change the future, to eliminate casual day to day racism.

Last week, when they threw that statue in the harbour, it looked bad. But sometimes direct action like that makes a bigger impact than all the polite conversation in the world. I'm not condoning rioting or violence, but I do know that through out history people have sometimes taken drastic action to get their point across. We are living in historic times.

We've both said our bit now!

[barney]

Sorry to disagree Gill but in my opinion, it’s just topic of the month.
Next month, the protesters will move on to another topic and this one will be confined to history.

It’s already moved on from the original point.

If you have Netflix, I’d highly recommend a docu called 13th.
It’s about blatant racism in the US penal system.
It’s genuinely shocking and shows that people in the U.K. have little to protest about in comparison.

Here, young people are complaining about a bad vibe.
There, they are being locked up with very long sentences for relatively minor crimes due to their plea bargain system.
It’s very thought provoking.

[Gill W]

Let's see what happens in half an hour. Van Tam or Harries might appear and we can all give a sigh of relief that they haven't been banished!

Not Van Tam, but one of the others (Chief Nurse) has seemingly been dropped for refusing to support Cummings. If the report is correct, we weren't far wrong: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 62741.html

That report seems entirely feasible to me, as the Chief Nurse has mysteriously disappeared too.

I think, how it will work now is that Johnson will do the briefings on Wednesday (it's his day at work as he is obligated to do PMQs), and they will wheel out Whitty and Vallence, as they have not openly spoken out against Cummings. They weren't allowed to, as Johnson jumped in before they could answer the question! The rest of the week, the minister's sidekicks will be non scientist types.

I think Cummings has an iron grip on 10 Downing Street, and he controls everything. I don't actively watch the briefings anymore, as they are little more than propaganda. I just have the TV on in the background just in case something new is said, like 'support bubbles' the other day!

They’ve found a medical type for this evening. I think he must be one who didn’t call Cummings out for the Barnard Castle trip!

[screwy]

That’s Sooo last month .

On another note, David Lammy says , we fought the Second World War to ‘ protect ‘ the EU.

[towny44]

That’s Sooo last month .

On another note, David Lammy says , we fought the Second World War to ‘ protect ‘ the EU.

You have to hand it to him for having such foresight.

[screwy]

Was going to say something that begins with fore but I won’t..

[Manoverboard]

Was going to say something that begins with fore but I won’t..

( Singing now) .... Fore-ees a jolly good fellow ... was it ?

.

[screwy]

Not quite.

[oldbluefox]

Was going to say something that begins with fore but I won’t..

Best not but I think I know what you mean!!!

[Manoverboard]

Was going to say something that begins with fore but I won’t..

Best not but I think I know what you mean!!!

Ah, a Fox type clue ... is it ' forerunner '

[screwy]

Well it’s not forefinger.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Is it fish fingers?

[screwy]

Oh you little tinkers....you just want me to say it, then someone will complain.!

[screwy]

There is a large gathering of Veterans at the Cenotaph, I am waiting to hear the media say , ‘ a far right group’. These are Veterans not far right.They are protecting the Cenotaph from Left wing anarchists.

[Gill W]

Why does the Cenotaph need protecting? it's been boarded up.

I hope the veterans have kept themselves separate from the aggressive crowd of middle aged white men who appeared to be well tanked up at lunch time, swearing, chanting and attacking the police.

[screwy]

Give me strength.

[Manoverboard]

Why does the Cenotaph need protecting? it's been boarded up.

I hope the veterans have kept themselves separate from the aggressive crowd of middle aged white men who appeared to be well tanked up at lunch time, swearing, chanting and attacking the police.

It shouldn't need boarding up ...

It celebrated all races so there's no excuse for the animals amongst the protesters who would dare to deface it
.

[towny44]

Give me strength.

Ditto.

[screwy]

I will say one thing. The far right are an absolute disgrace and I have no time for them, but equally the same can be said of the far left.

End of.

[Gill W]

Why does the Cenotaph need protecting? it's been boarded up.

I hope the veterans have kept themselves separate from the aggressive crowd of middle aged white men who appeared to be well tanked up at lunch time, swearing, chanting and attacking the police.

It shouldn't need boarding up ...

It celebrated all races so there's no excuse for the animals amongst the protesters who would dare to deface it
.

No it shouldn't need boarding up. Nor should the statues of Churchill, Ghandi and Mandela.


The Black Lives Matter protest was cancelled for today, as it was known that ...er... 'others' were going to be in town. At lunch time it looked like a load of drunk football supporters spoiling for a fight - the idea of 'protecting statues' is just a smokescreen. This looks like a mob out for trouble. Last week in London, the majority of protesters were peaceful with a small minority of trouble makers kicking off late in the day. This week it's a majority looking for trouble and starting it early. Loads of videos to confirm what I'm saying. Here's a couple of the least worst, and I don't think there's any swearing on them

https://twitter.com/i/status/1271761377317851136

https://twitter.com/i/status/1271801570456481794

[Gill W]

Give me strength.

Ditto.

Give me strength too.

I try to give information that you won't see because you stick to the BBC, but I can see you prefer what you are given on TV - ironically while complaining about about the BBC !

[Gill W]

I will say one thing. The far right are an absolute disgrace and I have no time for them, but equally the same can be said of the far left.

End of.

I agree with you there, and I think it's the far right who are on the streets today