Election

[caz]

I've already met one juvenile who reduced the debate to name-calling....
Are there any adults left in the UK?

If name-calling doesn't include calling people you disagree with 'woke', it doesn't include calling a massive tosser like Farage a massive tosser.

I doubt the massive tosser himself gives a toss what either of us thinks. He has been too busy defending what Putin is doing to Ukraine.

[caz]

You're confusing apples with oranges.
Ukrainian mothers with children are already westernized, they know right from wrong, they follow western customs, they obey the laws of their new host country.
They have manners.
They don't go around slandering Jews, threatening Christians, carrying on like the UK is their country.
You can't hope to address the problems if you do not understand what 4 million +, voters have voted for.

There's another govt. document I turned up yesterday that listed Migrants applying for Asylum who have a polygamous relationship (more than one wife), can receive about £350, and £114 for each additional wife, per month. Muslims, I think, are allowed 4 wives. At least those I spoke to in Egypt said that was the case.

I don't know if you are old enough to remember the Conservative party of the 50' - 70's, this Reform party are only promoting the same values. Sunak's Conservatives are not Conservative any more, they have shifted to a Left-wing party, which is why a lot of Brit's say they have two parties on the left, but nothing on the right.
Both the Labor & Cons. are basically the same, no significant difference.
Reform have taken up the banner of the old Conservatives; Secure Borders, Reduce Immigration, Lower Taxes, Scrap Net Zero, Reform the NHS to be fit for purpose, bolster police, Leave the ECHR, and so on.
A return to a basic Conservative platform.
This is what over 4 million voters preferred.

Why this is related to your post is, once the adults (Reform) do get in to power the laws covering immigration will be tightened so that any applicant must:
- Prove who they are.
- Show proof of education.
- Prove they have an adequate grasp of the English language.
- Swear to follow & acknowledge all laws & customs.
and so on.

Every country must have the ability to decide who enters their country, and how many.

Happily, four million voters - and those who left our country many years ago - do not get to decide for the rest of us how things ought to be.

I don't think I have ever read so much nonsense in Pub Talk before. I would like to think it was the drink talking, but I suspect it was the bile.

[Wickerman]

Ed Stow once called me 'woke' because I laughed at the way he keeps referring to Lechmere's mother as the "twice bigamously married Maria Lechmere."

It's really weird sort of logic. I'm the one who isn't outraged or offended or trying to make mileage out of the fact that a woman abandoned by her drunken husband remarried after seven years (a societal norm) yet I'm the one who is 'woke.'

It's one of the reasons I find this particularly buzzword meaningless.

To be "woke" was originally a positive position to take. It was a term used to describe anyone who was looking out for things like; injustice, inequality & racial discrimination. Essentially, looking out for the rights of the minority, defending the "little guy".

What is unfortunate is this defense has turned into an ideology used by the minority to subjugate the majority.
The "little guy", through woke ideology is attempting to impose their minority views on the majority of the nation - which must be rejected at all levels.
Like they say - "give them an inch and they'll take a mile".

As an example, a small minority want to change the national school curriculum to impose their multi-gender philosophy on every school child.
This is teaching lies about biology to radicalise future generations.

[caz]

I'm not sure Wickerman deliberately moved the goal posts, I find his last bit 'And, coming from a safe country, like France, disqualifies them from being legal migrants,' slightly untrue as I believe he means 'legal asylum seekers.'

However as regards to gaslighting - Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse where a person causes someone to question their sanity, memories, or perception of reality.

I think his posts are far from that. He is not trying to psychologically abuse anyone. Another 'woke' phrase often misused?

Maybe it's more a case of self-gaslighting when someone's own perception of reality comes from a place that is so far removed - factually, figuratively and literally - from the reality of living in the UK?

My late ma-in-law always used to say that if you can't think of anything nice to say about someone, don't say anything at all.

Most of us, being human, find it impossible to stick to that, and even the mother-in-law - more angel than human - had to admit to the odd lapse. I tend to fall back on the one about not dishing it out if you can't take it. If you don't want to be 'labelled', you can always change the contents, or not hand your opinions out like poisoned smarties. It's not so easy to admit it to yourself if the views you express are accurately labelled - as they often are.

Love,

Caz
X

[Wickerman]

Persistent misrepresentation, accidentially or on purpose IS gaslighting. the "abuse" is the result of being gaslight, not the result of "abuse" (noun vs. verb). Wickerman's persistent misrepresentations regarding what legal and illegal immigrants are alledged to get from HM such-and-so causes damage to one's perception of reality.

It's hardly "alleged" when it is publicly available on the internet.
We can either stick our heads in the sand, or face reality and address the problems head-on.

[rjpalmer]

I never said it was.

Ed Stow once called me 'woke' because I laughed at the way he keeps referring to Lechmere's mother as the "twice bigamously married Maria Lechmere."

It's really weird sort of logic. I'm the one who isn't outraged or offended or trying to make mileage out of the fact that a woman abandoned by her drunken husband remarried after seven years (a societal norm) yet I'm the one who is 'woke.'

It's one of the reasons I find this particularly buzzword meaningless.

[Geddy2112]

Woke isn't a buzzword?

I never said it was.

[rjpalmer]

Hi, Svensson. I'm not a fan of these 'buzzwords' like erm buzzword haha. I hate all the corporate BS with 'touching base' etc so I'm not a fan of the term gaslighting etc. It just does not sit right with me. It's for me another 'wokey' word to help bolster the fact 'I'm offended' and you have made me upset

Woke isn't a buzzword?

[caz]

Hi Wick!

Ms Diddles is utterly ambivalent about this!

GB news and Migrant Watch are hardly known for their objective reportage.

This is the usual misinformation and incendiary rhetoric.

The Home Office have stated that mobile phones were indeed issued as a temporary measure during Covid restrictions when face-to-face interviews were not possible.

https://fullfact.org/online/asylum-seeker-free-iphone/

They are not issued as a matter of course and this sounds like a perfectly sensible measure during Covid to me.

The GB News video appears to be talking about mobile phones issued by the charity Care for Calais not taxpayer-funded (although I must admit, my eyes glazed over and I gave up before the end)

What about those tax-payer funded bicycles?

Where did that come from?

Hi Ms Diddles,

Ooh, please miss! Did Jacob Rees-Mogg donate his redundant penny-farthing bicycles, to try and make his fellow countrymen even more angry about asylum seekers than they were already?

Do I win £5?

If the anger is directed at you and me instead, for telling it like it is, perhaps they will leave minorities alone who will never enjoy anything like the benefits that their loudest critics have always taken for granted, solely by accident of birth and not because they had to work their way up from extreme deprivation caused by world events or people better off than themselves.

My heart bleeds for those who imagine they have never had it so bad, and that this is because people who are infinitely worse off - and always will be - have never had it so good.

This may officially be a Christian country, but where have all its values gone?

Love,

Caz
X

[Geddy2112]

I can't speak to his exact motivations for repeating debunked talking points but my perception is certainly that he is attempting to gaslight the casual reader of this thread into thinking something that is not rooted in reality. To me, that broadly fits the description of gaslighting and it is the repetition that is the key here.

Hi, Svensson. I'm not a fan of these 'buzzwords' like erm buzzword haha. I hate all the corporate BS with 'touching base' etc so I'm not a fan of the term gaslighting etc. It just does not sit right with me. It's for me another 'wokey' word to help bolster the fact 'I'm offended' and you have made me upset and I want justice from you!!!
In this very thread I got attacked for basically saying the capital city of my home country does not feel, for want of a better term 'British.' This was a true observation. I got labelled racist and Xenophobic. I was absolutely not being those things I was making an observation. I also stated I was unhappy that people coming from other countries are trying to change British culture and way of life which in my opinion is disrespectful. It's the when in Rome type of affair. Again an observation not X or R but there we have it.
Too many folk nowadays are quick to jump in with the wokey buzzwords, the R and X card and of course the 'I'm offended' rubbish. This country is deteriorating fast and yes there are plenty of reasons but for me (an observation) one of them is immigrants wishing for Britain to change to suit them instead of them changing to suit Britain.

Hopefully this time I've made my points without being called X or R.

[Svensson]

So you are saying you feel abused by Wickerman's postings?

Not at all. I feel they are disingenuous. Various people have demonstrated that some of his statements are incorrect but he has decided to stick to incorrect statements.

If this is the case then surely it means every time someone posts a view which someone else does not hold true then they are being 'abused' and are a 'victim.' Dear me... sorry state of affairs I must say.

Yes it would be a sorry state of affairs. Thank god it isn't.

'Gaslighting is a colloquialism, defined as manipulating someone into questioning their own perception of reality. The expression, which derives from the title of the 1944 film Gaslight, became popular in the mid-2010s. Merriam-Webster cites deception of one's memory, perception of reality, or mental stability. According to a 2022 Washington Post report, it had become a "trendy buzzword" frequently improperly used to describe ordinary disagreements, rather than those situations that align with the word's historical definition.'

I'm not seeing how Wickerman is manipulating anyone here, especially into questioning their own perception of reality. If you do not believe what he says then that is fine, if you do that is fine too. The clue here is 'trendy buzzword' which we all know what that really means.

I can't speak to his exact motivations for reapeating debunked talking points but my perception is certainly that he is attempting to gaslight the casual reader of this thread into thinking something that is not rooted in reality. To me, that broadly fits the description of gaslighting and it is the repitition that is the key here.

[Geddy2112]

Persistent misrepresentation, accidentally or on purpose IS gaslighting. the "abuse" is the result of being gaslight, not the result of "abuse" (noun vs. verb). Wickerman's persistent misrepresentations regarding what legal and illegal immigrants are alleged to get from HM such-and-so causes damage to one's perception of reality.

So you are saying you feel abused by Wickerman's postings? If this is the case then surely it means every time someone posts a view which someone else does not hold true then they are being 'abused' and are a 'victim.' Dear me... sorry state of affairs I must say.

'Gaslighting is a colloquialism, defined as manipulating someone into questioning their own perception of reality. The expression, which derives from the title of the 1944 film Gaslight, became popular in the mid-2010s. Merriam-Webster cites deception of one's memory, perception of reality, or mental stability. According to a 2022 Washington Post report, it had become a "trendy buzzword" frequently improperly used to describe ordinary disagreements, rather than those situations that align with the word's historical definition.'

I'm not seeing how Wickerman is manipulating anyone here, especially into questioning their own perception of reality. If you do not believe what he says then that is fine, if you do that is fine too. The clue here is 'trendy buzzword' which we all know what that really means.

[Svensson]

I'm not sure Wickerman deliberately moved the goal posts, I find his last bit 'And, coming from a safe country, like France, disqualifies them from being legal migrants,' slightly untrue as I believe he means 'legal asylum seekers.'

However as regards to gaslighting - Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse where a person causes someone to question their sanity, memories, or perception of reality.

I think his posts are far from that. He is not trying to psychologically abuse anyone. Another 'woke' phrase often misused?

Persistent misrepresentation, accidentially or on purpose IS gaslighting. the "abuse" is the result of being gaslight, not the result of "abuse" (noun vs. verb). Wickerman's persistent misrepresentations regarding what legal and illegal immigrants are alledged to get from HM such-and-so causes damage to one's perception of reality.

[The Rookie Detective]

Post of the year for me, Rookie D.

Magnificent.

Love,

Caz
X

Thank you Caz for your kind words.


RD

[String]

I think it’s time I left this forum. I don’t wish to be in the same room as some of vile people in here.
Goodbye.