London and UK riots (started in Tottenham 10:30PM, 6th Aug)

Liam Byrne

Happyman42 wrote: »

That is unbelievably sad. To be so inhumane, I mean. Goes beyond the triteness of the normal internet warrior.

If all of the people I am talking about had taken to the streets Liam you would be looking at a wasteland. Thank your lucky stars it is contained ...for now.

I have no idea who you are talking about, or what the implicit threat in your "....for now" is about.

All I know is that if people who think arson and murder and looting is acceptable end up creating / taking over society, I won't want to be part of it.

I don't want to be part of the current setup either, mind you, before you start misrepresenting me.

As for being patronising and claiming that my views are "sad", well you've just earned yourself a re-ignore from this individual; you appear to be completely incapable of making a point without throwing in some patronising rubbish or smart-arse remark.

Then again, maybe I should be thankful that that's all you do to people you disagree with, unlike the people you are excusing who would have burned down boards by now.

Good luck with that dog-eat-dog society, where you won't even have a computer to type anything on because one of the dogs that you're excusing will have considered it their right to rob it, and would have burnt down your house - apparently with you standing in the garden nodding "I understand, my child, I understand".

Yahew

Is there any chance that this thread - running for a week could have 4-5 posts without Happyman42 opining.

Happyman42

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I have no idea who you are talking about, or what the implicit threat in your "....for now" is about.

All I know is that if people who think arson and murder and looting is acceptable end up creating / taking over society, I won't want to be part of it.

I don't want to be part of the current setup either, mind you, before you start misrepresenting me.

As for being patronising and claiming that my views are "sad", well you've just earned yourself a re-ignore from this individual; you appear to be completely incapable of making a point without throwing in some patronising rubbish or smart-arse remark.

Then again, maybe I should be thankful that that's all you do to people you disagree with, unlike the people you are excusing who would have burned down boards by now.

Good luck with that dog-eat-dog society, where you won't even have a computer to type anything on because one of the dogs that you're excusing will have considered it their right to rob it, and burn down your house.

You call me patronising???? :rolleyes::rolleyes: Brilliant Liam...brilliant.

Happyman42

Yahew wrote: »

Is there any chance that this thread - running for a week could have 4-5 posts without Happyman42 opining.

I'll leave you to your holocaust fantasies. Poor Liam is getting upset. :D

Ulysses Gaze

Happyman42 wrote: »

That's interesting, any sources for that? Not disputing it, just interested.

The Tories were cutting too though and there is more to come, just like here.

The Tories are cutting but Labour can't be exonerated from the build-up of tension given they were 14 years in power and a) had ample funds to at least resource a more proactive, street-based solution of the type you proffer (similar to FF here btw) and b) were supposed to be the more 'humanistic' of the UK political parties (I know, I know New Labour were a watered down Tory party in essence.)

The thing is Miliband and New, New Labour would be in a similar position and I don't think could, or should that be would, make a significant difference.

denhaagenite

Taken from my Facebook profile in response to me posting the Petition to pull benefits from convicted looters earlier:

BLEEDING HEART: Why would you sign something like that, if people don't get benefits do you think they will say "hey, you know what I was wrong let me just be a good citizen and stop being angry at society, its not that bad, look at the lovely house I grew up in, look at the way I was treated with respect and equality when I went to school, look how I didn't wish I got extra support and piano lessons while my family struggled to make ends meet, I do live in a fair society where white collar crime is punished, companies act ethically, politicians work for all the people and not the top paid 5% and stay true to why they entered politics". Sure while we signing petitions like this why stop there, let bring back Hitler he had the right ideas.

ME: I would sign because they are disrupting and endangering the lives, educations, homes and jobs of the people who deserve the resources they're getting. That and I fear for the wellbeing of their future children.

BLEEDING HEART: Yeah but it is a symptom of a deeper divide of an unequal society this does not happen in a functioning society - it is a sign that things are deeply wrong.

ME: Agreed, but these wrongs won't be righted by paying people to behave like this. They don't understand the consequences that their actions are having, and if someone doesn't understand something that fundamental then it is necessary to teach them.

BLEEDING HEART: I disagree, it is like in prisons if you treat people badly and don't rehabilitate them they do worse on release. This is a complex social issue and these riots are a result of years of bad government policy, poor housing lack of investment in community supports, lack of local services, capitalism etc.

VOICE OF REASON: You Lose (Street Fighter II Turbo Deluxe Edition Voice) http://en.wikipedia.org/wi​ki/Godwin%27s_law

BLEEDING HEART: Thanks VOICE OF REASON, I suppose it is bound to happen if we are talking people and human rights, Hilter was pretty up there on voliations of human rights.

ME: Labour's "Hug a Hoody" initiative has not worked, and whatever about treating people badly if they are rewarded for crimes they will continue to commit them. Money that is going towards people doing less than nothing, would be better put to use paying the wages of someone in a CE scheme to improve the outlook of these people.

VOICE OF REASON: Comparing Mass Genocide to:
"complex social issue and these riots are a result of years of bad government policy, poor housing lack of investment in community supports, lack of local services, capitalism etc."
Fail.

Sorry if it's hard to read. Godwin's Law FTW!

Dan I Am

denhaagenite wrote: »

Taken from my Facebook profile in response to me posting the Petition to pull benefits from convicted looters earlier:

BLEEDING HEART: Why would you sign something like that, if people don't get benefits do you think they will say "hey, you know what I was wrong let me just be a good citizen and stop being angry at society, its not that bad, look at the lovely house I grew up in, look at the way I was treated with respect and equality when I went to school, look how I didn't wish I got extra support and piano lessons while my family struggled to make ends meet, I do live in a fair society where white collar crime is punished, companies act ethically, politicians work for all the people and not the top paid 5% and stay true to why they entered politics". Sure while we signing petitions like this why stop there, let bring back Hitler he had the right ideas.

ME: I would sign because they are disrupting and endangering the lives, educations, homes and jobs of the people who deserve the resources they're getting. That and I fear for the wellbeing of their future children.

BLEEDING HEART: Yeah but it is a symptom of a deeper divide of an unequal society this does not happen in a functioning society - it is a sign that things are deeply wrong.

ME: Agreed, but these wrongs won't be righted by paying people to behave like this. They don't understand the consequences that their actions are having, and if someone doesn't understand something that fundamental then it is necessary to teach them.

BLEEDING HEART: I disagree, it is like in prisons if you treat people badly and don't rehabilitate them they do worse on release. This is a complex social issue and these riots are a result of years of bad government policy, poor housing lack of investment in community supports, lack of local services, capitalism etc.

VOICE OF REASON: You Lose (Street Fighter II Turbo Deluxe Edition Voice) http://en.wikipedia.org/wi​ki/Godwin%27s_law

BLEEDING HEART: Thanks VOICE OF REASON, I suppose it is bound to happen if we are talking people and human rights, Hilter was pretty up there on voliations of human rights.

ME: Labour's "Hug a Hoody" initiative has not worked, and whatever about treating people badly if they are rewarded for crimes they will continue to commit them. Money that is going towards people doing less than nothing, would be better put to use paying the wages of someone in a CE scheme to improve the outlook of these people.

VOICE OF REASON: Comparing Mass Genocide to:
"complex social issue and these riots are a result of years of bad government policy, poor housing lack of investment in community supports, lack of local services, capitalism etc."
Fail.

Sorry if it's hard to read. Godwin's Law FTW!

I don't think it is a case of 'Bleeding Heart' to be against cutting these kids benefits (not that most of them qualify for more than 'pocket money' anyway. Youth in UK get FA), I think it is bloody stupid from a practical point of view.

How do you think these 'sink estate' kids are going to support themselves with no job and no state benefits? The already know more than any youth should about crime. There is obviously an element of 'hearts and minds' here. Taking away their benefits is as good as saying 'we give up on you and are throwing away they key, take the criminal lifestyle'. If your objective is to turn these kids into productive members of society, you have to leave that minimum amount of money to survive legally (and it really is minimum, for youth especially, in the UK)

uberalles

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."

denhaagenite

Dan I Am wrote: »

I don't think it is a case of 'Bleeding Heart' to be against cutting these kids benefits (not that most of them qualify for more than 'pocket money' anyway. Youth in UK get FA), I think it is bloody stupid from a practical point of view.

How do you think these 'sink estate' kids are going to support themselves with no job and no state benefits? The already know more than any youth should about crime. There is obviously an element of 'hearts and minds' here. Taking away their benefits is as good as saying 'we give up on you and are throwing away they key, take the criminal lifestyle'. If your objective is to turn these kids into productive members of society, you have to leave that minimum amount of money to survive legally (and it really is minimum, for youth especially, in the UK)

Food and utilities vouchers, money only handed over when in education or a CE scheme. In the event that housing is required ie if it is not possible to live with family, they should be in a group home (whether they have a child or not) until the age of 18, with rules and curfews etc, just like any stable home environment.

uberalles

Dan I Am wrote: »

I don't think it is a case of 'Bleeding Heart' to be against cutting these kids benefits (not that most of them qualify for more than 'pocket money' anyway. Youth in UK get FA), I think it is bloody stupid from a practical point of view.

How do you think these 'sink estate' kids are going to support themselves with no job and no state benefits? The already know more than any youth should about crime. There is obviously an element of 'hearts and minds' here. Taking away their benefits is as good as saying 'we give up on you and are throwing away they key, take the criminal lifestyle'. If your objective is to turn these kids into productive members of society, you have to leave that minimum amount of money to survive legally (and it really is minimum, for youth especially, in the UK)

If you behave like a rabid dog, you loose benefit. Even the dogs on the street will understand that. Rough. Rough.

Dan I Am

denhaagenite wrote: »

Food and utilities vouchers, money only handed over when in education or a CE scheme. In the event that housing is required ie if it is not possible to live with family, they should be in a group home (whether they have a child or not) until the age of 18, with rules and curfews etc, just like any stable home environment.

Sounds like you are prepared to throw loads of money at the nihilistic alienated youth of London. No Politician of influence has had the inclination or ability to do so for coming on the fourth generation of immigrants now.

K-9

Dan I Am wrote: »

I don't think it is a case of 'Bleeding Heart' to be against cutting these kids benefits (not that most of them qualify for more than 'pocket money' anyway. Youth in UK get FA), I think it is bloody stupid from a practical point of view.

How do you think these 'sink estate' kids are going to support themselves with no job and no state benefits? The already know more than any youth should about crime. There is obviously an element of 'hearts and minds' here. Taking away their benefits is as good as saying 'we give up on you and are throwing away they key, take the criminal lifestyle'. If your objective is to turn these kids into productive members of society, you have to leave that minimum amount of money to survive legally (and it really is minimum, for youth especially, in the UK)

True, benefit payments are very low for young people in the UK already so you get a skewed, misinformed debate here based on Irish welfare rates.

Welfare payments in the UK are very much aimed at working, low income families. High working and childcare tax credits to supplement low wages.

You get a low minimum wage job for a multi national and the State subsidises the multi national.

Seen an interesting tweet about Republicans earlier today. If only they cared as much about individuals as foetuses and corporations!

Bit like the Tories except they only care about corporations.

Dan I Am

uberalles wrote: »

If you behave like a rabid dog, you loose benefit. Even the dogs on the street will understand that. Rough. Rough.

The implication being they should be shot? Do you already see yourself as others see you politically, in this thread, do you think?

Dan I Am

uberalles wrote: »

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."

I am either missing the irony here, or your joke is at least 4 years out of date?

denhaagenite

Dan I Am wrote: »

Sounds like you are prepared to throw loads of money at the nihilistic alienated youth of London. No Politician of influence has had the inclination or ability to do so for coming on the fourth generation of immigrants now.

Well what are they supposed to do, shoot them all? If money is taken away from people unless they help the local councils set up these initiatives, then there will be more money to put into them. It will also give them a purpose and foster a sense of community.

I do think that by putting more controls in place then maybe they would have less children, so people can't complain that the immigrants are taking all their jobs.

Also this keeps corporations happy by buying grocery, clothing and energy vouchers from them, hopefully at reduced prices for buying in bulk .

Show Time

uberalles wrote: »

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."

Democracy can be two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

bodhrandude

questionmark? wrote: »

Watching it on BBC now. Could not help noticing some bloke who was holding a baby. Ok thats normal and good parenting its 1am at night and there is a riot and he is standing there with a feckn baby. :rolleyes:

Perhaps his house was burned down.

Monty Burnz

Show Time wrote: »

Democracy can be two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

You have to ask though, who exactly is taking advantage of whom? The underclass are like the lotus eaters (100% leisure time) living at the expense of everyone else. What does everyone else gain from this situation? Nothing at all. What do the underclass gain? Free food, clothes, homes, and spending money. And the option of an education or a job if they want to join in with the workers.

I'd say our democracy is more like half a dozen sheep and one wolf. And guess who lives at the expense of whom?

grizzly

Monty Burnz wrote: »

You have to ask though, who exactly is taking advantage of whom? The underclass are like the lotus eaters (100% leisure time) living at the expense of everyone else. What does everyone else gain from this situation? Nothing at all. What do the underclass gain? Free food, clothes, homes, and spending money. And the option of an education or a job if they want to join in with the workers.

I'd say our democracy is more like half a dozen sheep and one wolf. And guess who lives at the expense of whom?

Not in some cases.

Conservative-run Wandsworth council in south London has started eviction proceedings against a woman whose son appeared in court charged in connection with the riots in Clapham Junction.

This seems rather harsh, but I suppose it's for the propose of setting an example to others.

Biggins

Interesting point of view from a Judge over the present riot cases
..And I think he has a point!

Saturday 13th, 2011. The Times (England)

Judge asks: where are the parents of rioters?

Parents who refuse to take responsibility for children accused of criminal offences were condemned by a judge yesterday who demanded to know why the mother of a 14-year-old girl in the dock over the looting of three shops was not in court.

District Judge Elizabeth Roscoe was incredulous when told that the girl’s parents were too busy to see their daughter appear before City of Westminster magistrates after she was accused of offences during the violent disorder in London this week.

She said that many parents “don’t seem to care” that their children were in court facing potentially lengthy custodial sentences.

Her comments echoed those a day earlier by District Judge Jonathan Feinstein when he highlighted the absence of parents at hearings in Manchester. “The parents have to take responsiblity for this child — apart from one case I have not seen any father or mother in court,” he said.

Their remarks coincide with an investigation by this newspaper into the reasons for the riots. Interviews conducted with young people and community workers on estates across London uncovered deep concerns about the lack of parental authority.

Youth workers said that mothers are too terrified of their own children to confront them and often turn a blind eye to cash or stolen goods brought home. An analysis by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) found that, among other factors linking the 18 areas worst hit by public disorder, is a high rate of single-parent families and broken homes.

And in an interview with The Times today, Shaun Bailey, a youth worker recently appointed as the Government’s “Big Society” czar, argues that childraising has been “nationalised”.

Of the defendants who appeared before magistrates in Westminster yesterday accused of riot crimes across London, half were aged under 18, but few parents attended the hearings, even though their children had been in police custody for up to two days.

One member of the court’s staff said: “I can’t recall seeing any of the parents down here. Usually when there are children in court the mum will come to give support, and it looks good in front of the judge.”

The 14-year-old girl is accused of joining in a “frenzy of looting” in Wood Green, North London, during which she allegedly stole clothing, make-up and CDs from H&M, Boots and HMV. The girl, who had been in custody for a day and a half, was asked by judge: “Where is your mother? You are 14.”

When told that both parents were too busy to come to court the judge added: “That is all well and good but their child is in the dock.”

The girl’s solicitor then told the court that her mother would collect her from court if she were granted bail. Judge Roscoe agreed, saying: “You should be grateful that your mother is coming to pick you up. For many others there is nobody to come to get them or pick them up. They don’t seem to care.”

The judge ordered the girl to return straight to her home in Tottenham, North London, under a curfew, which will be enforced by an electronic tag.

Earlier a boy of 14 had appeared in court charged with using threatening words during disturbances in Kentish Town, North London. A boy of 15 was accused of looting a JD Sports shop in Barking, East London. A 17-year-old student from East London was also accused of receiving £10,000 of mobile phones, cigarettes and clothing looted from Tesco. The items and small quantity of cannabis were discovered in his bedroom at the family home.

Judge Roscoe’s comments came as community workers admitted that broken families often led to children taking to crime. One youth worker, who has helped children in Lambeth, South London, for 20 years, told The Times that single mothers were often scared of their sons. “They would not challenge them if they came home with stolen goods,” the worker, who did not wish to be named, said. “In some cases these young men steal more than their mother earns or gets in benefit. They become the father figure, the main earner.”

Young men echo the lack of authority. “My mum can’t tell me what to do,” said Lee, 18, from Copley Court, an estate in West Ealing. “It’s the same with young kids. Most of their dads left early on and they don’t listen to anyone.”

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article3123392.ece

Additional interesting graphic info: http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/2154/captureqvm.jpg

Can't be even bothered to show up - none but one!
Terrible, just terrible.

jill_valentine

Jaysus, that's grim from the ground up.

MagicSean

When I think of all the hassle I got when my dog got loose one time and here are useless parents letting their kids run riot and no consequences at all for them.

oppenheimer1

So did anyone else see David Starkey on Newsnight tonight. Went on a bit of a racist rant and blamed black culture and went on about the english feeling like foreigners in their own country. He even said that the whites involved had become black. Bizarre inflammatory telly it was!

jill_valentine

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

So did anyone else see David Starkey on Newsnight tonight. Went on a bit of a racist rant and blamed black culture and went on about the english feeling like foreigners in their own country. He even said that the whites involved had become black. Bizarre inflammatory telly it was!

It was one of the weirdest meltdowns I've ever seen in real time on the BBC. Telling black people they were really white, and declaring white people black?

From the moment he told the black lady on the panellist that she didn't "speak like one of them" my jaw dropped.

Extraordinary stuff. Properly mental old-grandad-at-a-barbeque kind of racism, with a dash of weird old professer eccentricity.

Chuck Stone

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

So did anyone else see David Starkey on Newsnight tonight. Went on a bit of a racist rant and blamed black culture and went on about the english feeling like foreigners in their own country. He even said that the whites involved had become black. Bizarre inflammatory telly it was!

Linky?

Edit: Got it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14513517

extra edit:

'It wasn't inter communal violence'

The good guys (whites) have become (black) the bad guys.

Oh dear.

oppenheimer1

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Linky?

Edit: Got it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14513517

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2_6ggJf3ns


It couldn't happen to a "nicer" person. He is so arrogant and rude its unbelievable. He was trending topic on twitter tonight.

jill_valentine

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

It couldn't happen to a "nicer" person. He is so arrogant and rude its unbelievable. He was trending topic on twitter tonight.

Have you ever seen the audience reaction scene from The Producers?

That's what Twitter was like.

Chuck Stone

"The whites have become black''
"The whites have become black''
"The whites have become black''
"The whites have become black''
"The whites have become black''
"The whites have become black''
"The whites have become black''
"The whites have become black''

Oh noes! How will we be able to tell who are good and who are evil?!

Everything was so simple when the blacks were the bad guys but now we have to deal with white people being blacks!

Saw a few minutes of a piece on Sky News, think it was called Looters. In it they spoke to a group of youths who admitted to looting. They went on and on trying to justify the looting, I got no reply when I drop on a CV and if I was a penny short the shop wouldnt let me buy what I wanted so it's okay for me to destroy the livliehood of hundreds of people. The word to describe these people is scum, really shocking when you consider just how skewered our society is toward defending these people.

Once upon a time people like those involved in the looting were classified as being bad people or scum but now we have to go out of our way to explain their actions. We can't hold them accountable for their actions, it's society's fault.

You have to love the way every time that footage of the looting is shop the presenters seem to go out of their way to point out any White person in the crowd. It would be comical if it wasn't so tragic that PCness has gotten to the stage that you can't point out the truth, that the majority of those involved in the looting are not White.

Run_to_da_hills

"Riot boy's family is kicked out of home: Suspected looter and his mother are the first to be punished with eviction"

Where will all these people that are kicked out of their council houses end up? We could probably see them moving into some kind of a halting sites.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2024605/UK-riots-Daniel-Sartain-Clarkes-family-evicted-Wandsworth-Council.html