Thursday, August 11, 2011

+++ Tenants entirely unaffected by riots +++

David Cameron: Police admit they got riots wrong

"The police admitted they got their riot tactics wrong, the prime minister has said, as he announced measures to help homeowners and businesses."

Posted by mark wadsworth @ 01:53 PM (2621 views)
Please complete the required fields.



34 thoughts on “+++ Tenants entirely unaffected by riots +++

  • The fundamental problems are so obvious, why can’t they admit to what the problems really are and do something about them?
    The trouble of denying the real issues and blaming parents entirely is that this issue will not go away. It will flare up worse in the near future.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Oh and the correct term is ‘householder’.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • @1…virtually exactly the same as the arab spring…difference is we urged leaders to listen to the people and then in libya…we helped the rebels kill government troops costing #250 million pounds and rising.

    what we didn’t realise is that 75% of the people in libya are employed by the government!..so it was doomed

    what a shambles

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • TC
    surely you are not casting aspersions on Our Fundamental Benevolence?
    N

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • in vietnam US killed 2 million people including women and children!

    3000 killed in 9/11 resulting in 250,000 dead in iraq and afganistan

    US spends $1 trillion per annum on defense…1/4 of its income

    iran hasn’t invaded anyone in 300 years.

    not quite sure if I’m on the right side sometimes

    nickb…you mean we give millions to these evil states…don’t believe it

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • @5. titaniccaptain

    what happened to the gold thread??

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I mean: in recent decades: indonesia, yugoslavia, iraq, afghanistan for starters…our direct or indirect involvement as not portrayed at all, or as distorted by mainstream media. (as per e.g. Ian Curtis’ “Web of Deceit.”) we also have the largest “defence” budget on earth in per capita terms, do we not?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • TC
    Yes, but what did I do?!
    It’s the elites what dunnit.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • The people of this country are not apathetic or stupid. They just don’t agree with you

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • The people of Britain are able to see a bigger, more balanced and more sophisticated picture than you give them credit for. It is unwise of you to default to the attitude that, whenever you are out of kilter with the majority opinion, the people must in some way, be conditioned, ill-informed, apathetic and stupid.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • The recent bit of bother nails the “people in Britain are apathetic” argument. People are alientated, directionless and struggling to get by, but most definitely not apathetic.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • OK, so we all agree that the apathy argument isn’t correct. It usually takes a few more posts that that

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • bbc,sky didn’t show it but cnn and euronews did..boris johnson being confronted by a very articulate black guy about how kids youth clubs closed down,ema stopped,student loans 4k to insure a car but still find the money to bomb libya and help the rioters there.

    I don’t condone violence/looters,but I think they are better informs than mainstream media would have you believe

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • What are you lot on about. Some people are apathetic, others aren’t. A lot are definitely stupid, but another lot clearly aren’t. Those who want to be properly informed of world events, are, but a lot would rather watch Jeremy Kyle. But isn’t that the issue? Our society has “evolved” into one in where the gap between the haves and the have nots has become too wide because we define being successful as having wealth.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • TC @ 27. There have been a large number of riot-like events since the bank bailouts and consequent attempts to deal with mess. There are countless sites, meetings, videos and other voices of dissent. Look at all the people on the streets yesterday to clean up. Look at the people who’ve already raised thousands of pounds for the young student mugged by his “helpers.” In London and other cities on any given night I could take you to any number of public political meetings and talks. You mistake a lack of effective power for apathy I think. There’s a lot of action being taken but it’s spread out. When it does get organized we call them yobs, like the student demos-riot-lite last year. The risk isn’t apathy at the moment, politics has failed, the real risk is demagoguery.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • happy mondays says:

    Too much conditioning & handing out peanuts & crap tv to the British voters..Now don’t rock the boat guy’s or you will lose all that you have worked for, your shoebox & your pension, if your lucky.. whilst the governing elite play games with us & enjoy lavish lifestyles..That’s not even apathy it’s bending over the kitchen table & being shafted where the sun don’t shine..

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • …not to mention scapegoating.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Are you saying people only act when they are directly affected by an issue? I don’t subscribe to that idea either. The other thing to remember is that it takes surprisingly small numbers of people to change things. For better and worse.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I would add that the ones that are apathetic are largely the ones that shouldn’t be and the ones that aren’t largely don’t have the right to not be. It should be tax payers and savers out shouting about being shafted, not the ones who expect to able to live on benefits and cause chaos because the benefits they don’t earn are being cut.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • The choices are quite ugly and most people know that. There’s a rabbit in the headlights quality about the electorate I think. There is literally no one worth casting a vote for. If you want things to change and a system that works for the majority – not even a perfect system, just a least worst one then the choice appears to be limited, you can have to gin and oblivion or rioting and serious jail time. The sensible response is “make mine a large one.” People are also very tightly controlled. The state’s response to the rioting, with the mass arrests that appear to be happening at the moment prove you have zero chance of getting away with a bit of looting never mind serious political change in Britain. People know the system is so stacked against them there is almost point in trying. It’s spirit crushing. On another thread I ranted a bit and said – put a bomb under the whole country please. As soon as I clicked ADD COMMENT I started to worry some Stasi official might take me seriously.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • If enough people in this country really care about something ,then they react. We have a proven track record in this regard. When British people see a picture of a starving Biafran child, they tend give more per person than almost any other country. When there was a Nazi threat, people formed queues to have a crack. When a few rioters threatened our streets and reputation, they mobilised against them at considerable personal risk. When the poll tax irritated them. When they disapproved of the SUS laws. The list goes on and it is naive to think that the character of the country has completely altered in the last few years.

    It is therefore entirely incorrect to call British people apathetic. They cannot be expected to vigorously react to every minority hobby horse, no matter how seriously the minority take it (and yes, that does include Cantona’s bank run).

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • happy mondays says:

    As Albert Einstein say’s “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”

    Maybe time for a change 😉

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • mervin king knew the apathy would change….thats why he propped up the housing market…he also noted he was surprised people weren’t more angry with the banks

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • “Are you saying people only act when they are directly affected by an issue?”…..”Yes I am”

    Clearly not remotely true. When people see a starving African they are not directly affected but they nevertheless donate. When a girl goes missing in Portugal, they are not directly affected but they are moved to donate. When the Argentineans attacked the Falklands, they were not directly affected but they put away their dislike of Thatcher and cheered on her response. The list goes on and on.

    Regarding foreign policy: Most people would rather we were not involved in Afghanistan and Iraq but they are sophisticated enough to understand that the issue is not clear-cut. In Afghanistan they were mutilating woman and children and they harboured a bunch that wanted to kill us all. Hussein had invaded a country and was using gas and torture against his own people. As a result of our invasion, they now have a half decent democracy and some hope for the future. The rights and wrongs of the invasions involve an immensely complicated cause and effect argument but it is anything but clear-cut. That is why there is not a unified and overwhelming response to our invasion of these two countries. I was very against the invasion and I wish we not in Afganistan but I’d shy away from painting it as some sort of super simple black or white issue. The ‘people’ understand that it is a complicated issue.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • happy mondays says:

    Why thank you tc, as you can see i cannot take credit for it, but i am smart enough to appreciate, an intellect above the normal range of thinking!
    @ taffee, i bet Merv though that he had Done a Derren Brown mind trick on the public, after no back lash or reaction with the bank scam, still most are in some sort of hypnotic state.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • [email protected]

    I actually really think he was gobsmacked….like someone who got away with something.I also think he is surprised he didn’t lose his job

    when you consider no banker/fsa/or boe member was prosecuted for potentially the biggest cockup/fraud in history

    wonder if blair/bush felt the same when people accepted the war in iraq/afganistan when the attackers mainly came from saudi arabia! and iraq had nothing to do with it.They actaully managed to kill many times saddam did and destroy all the infastructure

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • OK, so we’ve put the apathy debate to bed. Good

    Your post above is mostly conjecture, theory and personal opinion.

    The dumbing down of Britain is just a baseless cliché that has been trotted out by each successive generation for thousands of years. People used to be entertained by Love Thy Neighbour and It’s a Knock Out. We are no smarter or dumber than we ever were. Far more people don’t watch reality shows, than watch them. I could easily counter the ‘dumber now’ argument by pointing out that everyones’ favourite granny was probably a racist and that more people travel and experiment with foreign food etc etc than they ever did in the past.

    The fact is that Iraq now has a workable democracy where everyone has a vote. That is a tangible achievement. It is entirely possible that, in the event of an assassination, the remnants of his family and regime would have carried on without him, and that they would have murdered and tortured hundred of thousands of people in retribution. It is also possible that the fundamentalists would have stepped in before democracy had a chance to take hold. It is also possible that the ultimate death and murder toll would have eventually ended up greater had we not intervened. We can’t ever know for sure.

    Is the thanks of a young Afghan girl who has avoided being mutilated and can now go to school worth nothing? If you were in a position to refuse permission for the Afghanistan invasion, would you ever wonder about your decision when you saw the Taliban frequently stoning dissidents to death in a football stadium? Would you wonder about your decision if a sheltered Taliban was able to regularly kill British civilians with high street bombs or maybe even a dirty bomb?

    One of the main protest arguments said that we would never leave Iraq and that there would never be a democracy. They were wrong on both counts. The other main protest argument was that we were only in it for the oil. Well, we didn’t get an more contracts than countries who were not involved in the war and the Iraqis now have better terms on the oil extraction, than they had previously.

    We can only really know one thing about all this,which is that it is not clear cut. The majority of British people recognise this which is why there is no unified and overwhelming protest – despite everyone I’ve ever met wishing we weren’t there.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • By the way, you killed my marrows, I know where you live and I’m coming to get you

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • thats what we’ve been told…I wonder if you would have the same opinion if you lived there?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • titanic….yes…very impressive I thought

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • I knew the accord wouldn’t last.
    @48″One of the main protest arguments said that we would never leave Iraq and that there would never be a democracy” Um… no.

    The main argument was Iraq didn’t have weapons of mass destruction the war would lead to the death of countless civilians and was about control of Iraqi oil. Not to mention the further destabilization of an already unstable area. As for the workable democracy, that wasn’t even on my list of reasons for opposing the war.

    The imposition of democracy is an interesting justification. It’s what Isaiah Berlin would have called positive freedom. Carrying the danger now being realized in Iraq of authoritarianism. The democracy that there is not a western style of democracy that we will recognize. Iraq is only the most recent example where the West assumed the mantle of mass murderer in the name of freedom. Not something to boast about. The idea of killing your way to liberty is as utopian and as bankrupt as it is possible to be. Iraq is the graveyard of the neo-conservative dream. The fighting over control of Iraq’s oil hasn’t even warmed up yet.

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/06/bush-administration-role-in-iraq-oil.html

    http://www.disinfo.com/2011/08/leaked-documents-reveal-bps-control-over-iraqs-oil/

    http://platformlondon.org/documents/glass-box-print-low-res.pdf

    You also said
    “. It is entirely possible that, in the event of an assassination, the remnants of his family and regime would have carried on without him, and that they would have murdered and tortured hundred of thousands of people in retribution. It is also possible that the fundamentalists would have stepped in before democracy had a chance to take hold. It is also possible that the ultimate death and murder toll would have eventually ended up greater had we not intervened. We can’t ever know for sure.”

    All the war apologists spout the same speculative guff. “It’s entirely possible that…blah blah…hundreds of thousands murdered.”
    Except he did murder thousands with our support, he was OUR man the whole time he was doing the killing.

    Trying to claim the moral high ground over how many fictional victims he might have created as a vain attempt to distract from the mountains of dead bodies we are responsible for in the name of utopian dreams. You’re as bad as all the other utopian cultists in history.

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Fubar: you have singularly failed to counter a single argument

    I said: “One of the main protest arguments”

    You said: “Um… no. The main argument was”

    ‘One of the main’ is quite different to ‘the main’ and you of course failed to acknowledge or counter the inconvenient fact pointed out that three out of four of the main protest arguments were proven to be incorrect.

    “The imposition of democracy is an interesting justification”

    Freedom is way more than interesting. We didn’t impose democracy, we helped them get what the majority had emphatically wanted for decades. You are again trying to ignoring anything inconvenient, to aid your binary argument.

    “The fighting over control of Iraq’s oil hasn’t even warmed up yet.”

    Rubbish. You made that up.

    “The democracy that there is not a western style of democracy that we will recognize”

    Absolute cobblers. They go to the polls just like us and they are so eager and grateful for the chance to do so, that they sometimes risk being bombed by the sort of person who you would apparently rather we left in charge.

    I said: “It is entirely possible that, in the event of an assassination, the remnants of his family and regime would have carried on without him, and that they would have murdered and tortured hundred of thousands of people in retribution. It is also possible that the fundamentalists would have stepped in before democracy had a chance to take hold. It is also possible that the ultimate death and murder toll would have eventually ended up greater had we not intervened. We can’t ever know for sure.”

    You said: “All the war apologists spout the same speculative guff. “It’s entirely possible that…blah blah…hundreds of thousands murdered.”

    You again fail to counter a single point and resort to the frustrated and defeatist “speculative guff”. Every point I made is widely accepted as valid or even likely by anyone with an open mind or an ounce of reason. You will not get a handle on this argument unless you address information that doesn’t suit you.

    “Except he did murder thousands with our support, he was OUR man the whole time he was doing the killing”

    The whole time? You didn’t think that through, did you?. He was once our man but he can hardly have been said to have been our man when we invaded his country in the first Gulf War and beyond.

    “Trying to claim the moral high ground over how many fictional victims he might have created as a vain attempt to distract from the mountains of dead bodies we are responsible for in the name of utopian dreams. You’re as bad as all the other utopian cultists in history”

    There is absolutely nothing fictional about the victims he might have created. He had a multi-decade record of ethnic cleansing , gassing, torturing and killing anyone who wanted democracy and freedom in his country. There was no let up in these crimes in the run up to the invasion and absolutely no evidence to suggest that they would have stopped. You are once again committing the ‘bigot crime’ of ignoring inconvenient information that runs contrary to your determinedly one eyed point of view.

    The point I was illustrating was that the people of this country are able to discern that the Iraq/Afghanistan question is multifaceted…and that there has been no unified or emphatic protest, for the simple reason that they are sophisticated enough to understand that there are strong moral arguments and ramifications on both sides.

    My posts started off as a defense against the ‘stupid and apathetic’ slurs against the people of this country. However I would now go further by saying that ‘the people’ are clearly more sophisticated in their judgment than the one eyed, information ignoring people who are slurring them. I was strongly against the war but only an imbecile would think that there are no valid arguments for/positive ramifications resulting from, the removal of a homicidal dictator.

    I must say, fubar, that you have put up a poor show on this one. It should have been quite clear to you that my point was limited to pointing out the obvious fact that the matter is not clearcut enough for the people to unify and emphatically protest. Your emotionally ragged “your a war supporter” response was inappropriate

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • Unhappy Chappy says:

    Flashman – Do you advocate or oppose military support for the uprising in Libyia?, and would you advocate or oppose military support in Syria and Zimbabwe?

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



  • unhappy: My default position is that I’m against military intervention unless directly attacked. The trouble is that we often have blood on our hands if we do and blood on our hands if we don’t.

    On a philosophical level, what’s the difference between a person being tortured next door and a person being tortured a thousand miles away? Borders are arbitrary, so if you would help a neighbour then why not someone further afield? In other words, what’s more morally repugnant, going to a war with a mass murderer or standing aside and watching him murder people? I don’t know the answer, so I’m glad it’s not me making the decisions.

    One thing I do know is that it’s intellectually lazy to doggedly take one side and completely ignore the other

    Reply
    Please complete the required fields.



Add a comment

  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>