Police knocking on your door

Thanks Dickens
You are right.

If they knock on my door, I would direct them to the park to deal with the drug dealers who ride around on their electric bikes!

Iam64

Thanks Dickens for such a good summary and analysis

Thanks Iam64.

It might seem like I'm over-egging this matter but I think the world is in a state of conflict, against a background of accelerating technological change and economic uncertainty, and this has led to a rise of ultra-nationalist movements of both Right and Left. The European cordon sanitaire is now broken.

Our own MI6 chief, Sir Richard Moore, said Russia would not stop at Ukraine's borders and he said China would "weigh the implications, North Korea would be emboldened and Iran would become still more dangerous".

Elon Musk is agitating and provoking unrest - or attempting to - in the UK by previously suggesting that "civil war is inevitable" due to migration and open borders.

Although Meta Platforms owns 4 of the biggest SM platforms, X has millions of users. Musk, as the world's richest man, has a huge influence.

It's not difficult to see that mis-information, fake news, disinformation and conspiracy theories can - and did - spread like wildfire on social media. Hence the recent riots.

As they say, a lie can be half-way around the world before the truth has even put its boots on.

So, I think we are living in dangerous times, and that is why I feel strongly about the OP's original post.

As CP Scott said in 1921, comment is free, but facts are sacred.

Thanks Dickens for such a good summary and analysis

LadyInBlue

NotSpaghetti

Also people are being jailed for saying what they think and that is free speech being curtailed by the government.

Oh really! 🙄

Yes really, look at that poor man who hung himself in jail because he was locked up for saying things against the government. His funeral was yesterday.

Paedophiles have been let out of jail early so people who are speaking against the government can be locked up.

LadyInBlue

You insisted you were only asking a 'simple' question in your OP.

Most of us didn't see it that way because of the way you framed your final sentence.

I was initially willing to believe it was a sort of 'wry' comment, perhaps even tongue-in-cheek.

But then...

...look at that poor man who hung himself in jail because he was locked up for saying things against the government.

and this...

Paedophiles have been let out of jail early so people who are speaking against the government can be locked up.

Whilst there is some concern over those being released, back in May this year, the then PM, Rishi Sunak, claimed that no-one convicted of a serious violent offence - such as a sex offence - had been let out of prison early.

Now this was in spite of a report from the prison watchdog saying that a criminal - deemed a risk to children - had been released (from Lewes Prison).

However, this was before the riots broke out over the murder of those three young girls, it was in fact a scheme to address the overcrowding of prisons which had reached crisis point.

The politician challenging the PM was the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, then in Opposition.

Those involved in the riots were, by default, critical of the government, but that is not why they were charged - whether they were charged with actual physical assault / damage to property, or with conspiring with others, verbally, or via social media, to take part in the riots which were - essentially - aimed at asylum-seekers and fuelled by anti-immigrant sentiment.

Inciting others to violence, physical assault, damaging property... these are all criminal offences.

Simply "speaking-out" against the government of the day is not an offence.

So you are still trying to paint a picture of a government intent on clamping down on free-speech, and locking people up on that basis.

It's nonsense. And it's dangerous nonsense.

Elegran

She thought it was bad that people couldn't say what they thought, and then was offended when others said what they thought.

Brilliant, thanks

Boom boom

Elegran

She thought it was bad that people couldn't say what they thought, and then was offended when others said what they thought.

😜😜😂😂

She thought it was bad that people couldn't say what they thought, and then was offended when others said what they thought.

I don't think there was a pile on, just robust discussion about what was obviously ( to me, anyway) a goady post. We have lots of different opinions on here, we are all entitled to comment as we wish, and I stick by my comments that this post was deliberate mischief making and that the poster was rather quick to cry foul and accuse us all of bullying because she was rumbled. While we are on the subject, I object to being called a bully just because someone has been careless in what they posted, and I am being generous in my use of the word 'careless'.

So you had a bad experience on here Dickens? Am sorry to hear you were treated badly was it a political post?I don’t think anyone should receive a rough ride for something they post and want others to comment on unless it’s a foul tirade tbh but that’s my own opinion.

NotSpaghetti

*Oreo*, you may think the OP would be right to leave.
I don't think she should go over what is actually one disagreement on here.

I think all are welcome - including LadyInBlue who has commented on other threads.

I don't think she should go over what is actually one disagreement on here.

I don't think she should leave either.

... but I tell you, it doesn't half smart when you've made a bit of a fool of yourself and been called out on it. Been there, and definitely done that, myself. And it's not easy to admit that you might have made an 'unwise' or rash posting. I know that from experience.

The OP is in "Chat" but it's political... and that's nearly always a bit charged in discussions.

Blimey, I've seen far worse pile ons about far less.
That seems to have stopped, thankfully.

Hopefully the op will reconsider, and come back for a few less contentious chats.

NotSpaghetti

*Oreo*, you may think the OP would be right to leave.
I don't think she should go over what is actually one disagreement on here.

I think all are welcome - including LadyInBlue who has commented on other threads.

Yes I think that anyone would be right to leave, you’re correct on that at least.It’s my opinion, as I can’t have anyone elses opinion but my own.
There was no need for it at all, the pile on, in the way it was done on here.I hope the OP won’t leave but will perfectly understand if she does.

I don’t believe a word of it and if you actually believe that well what can I say!

NotSpaghetti

*Oreo*, you may think the OP would be right to leave.
I don't think she should go over what is actually one disagreement on here.

I think all are welcome - including LadyInBlue who has commented on other threads.

👏👏👏

Oreo, you may think the OP would be right to leave.
I don't think she should go over what is actually one disagreement on here.

I think all are welcome - including LadyInBlue who has commented on other threads.

Good post, Dickens.

I agree with Dickens. It is not a bad girl pile on when the consensus is the OP is nonsense. There are enough issues to criticise the government and opposition parties on without repeating inflammatory nonsense

I use YouTube a lot, if anyone’s interested (probably not but I’ll blather on anyway).

It’s great for how to fix things - it helped me bring a washing machine and a printer back to life. For exercise videos. For Jay’s weekly pub quiz. For how to construct a Tracy Island cake. And for “what did Paul Heaton - other musicians are available - do again?”.

I’ve never thought to use YouTube for getting news and views. I doubt I ever will now.

nanna8

When ‘they’ start censoring YouTube I’ll be worried. I like that you can get so many totally differing views on there. Extreme, moderate and just plain daft. Vivé la difference ,as they say !

YouTube is heavily censored.

I've lost count of just how often an obviously factual/researched video or the like has been censored off and whole channels shut down.

Sometimes it's a matter for debate just who does the most censoring - YouTube or Facebook - as they both make a regular habit of it. We all know that the most well-researched info. going can be put up there - with academics, doctors, etc giving the facts and it often mysteriously disappears.

Wyllow3

Perhaps the lesson is not to post unfounded and unreferenced social media claims without checking, and not to make contentious political remarks on the basis of those SM claims, Becuase they will always be checked and challenged.

We got into terrible deep water over the southport murders and riots when a poster published in here the actual original SM rumour about the perp. The thread was deleted by GN in the end as being dangerously speculative.

Unfortunately we live in a world full of false claims and conspiracy theories.

👏👏👏

Quite clearly we do not live in a police-state where government institutions exercise extreme levels of control over civil society and liberties (Wikipedia).

So if said government had instituted an exercise whereby the millions who'd signed the petition were to get a knock on the door from the local constabulary or one of the three special-forces, I'm pretty sure it would've been headline news.

Unless the current government had, overnight, used 'special powers' that only happen in, usually, times of war, then it must be obvious that signing a petition demanding another general election (or another referendum) is not a criminal offence.

So, yes, this is malicious gossip. And it's dangerous, as we've already seen with the previous riots which were, in effect, anti-asylum seeker, and anti-Muslim - because the perpetrator of that horrific crime was thought to belong to both groups. He was, in fact not an asylum-seeker and his religious background was Catholic.

Back in the day, Boris Johnson was, not infrequently, referred to as a Nazi - flippantly and casually. Much as I disliked the man, I think this was dangerous nonsense. As is referring to Starmer as a Führer and suggesting that it wouldn't be a surprise if we were to be forced to swear an oath of allegiance to him.

This is the kind of over-hyped rhetoric that the OP generates, and I, for one, make no apology for calling it out.

There is enough evidence-based material to use with which to criticise or condemn both the previous and current government without making stuff up - or promoting it on social-media which is inhabited by an awful lot of people, some of whom are less than stable. When the participants and judges of an entertainment programme, Strictly Come Dancing, allege that they've received death-threats (presumably for disqualifying the wrong candidate?), then you have to be aware of your wider 'audience' on social media and be responsible for the things you say.

nanna8

When ‘they’ start censoring YouTube I’ll be worried. I like that you can get so many totally differing views on there. Extreme, moderate and just plain daft. Vivé la difference ,as they say !

Exactly, and so many good things about it, the music and the ‘how to’ vids especially.

NotSpaghetti

LadyInBlue there's no need to leav

You are joking right? Why wouldn’t anyone leave a site after the mean girl pile on they experience here?
It wasn’t necessary and would put anyone off this forum who are just lurking and reading.GN members claim to be kind and understanding…..yeah, right!
All it needed was ‘ fake news, I hadn’t heard about it but wouldn’t believe it’.

Smileless2012

No I haven't heard about this LadyInBlue but I wish I'd signed it now .

Still can, it’s on until next year!

If it was to be true what a tremendous waste of police time when they could be doing far more important jobs like catching criminals