|
|
Post by aubrey on Oct 1, 2011 11:53:30 GMT
Yes. Basildon are breaking the law in not providing sites for travellers.
The green belt site that this lot are on now used to be a scrap yard.
Basildon are also selling off playing fields for development. They don't care that much about open spaces.
|
|
|
|
Post by lmh on Oct 1, 2011 12:12:37 GMT
That programme was a disappointment (maybe only because I was already familiar with all the arguments?) because they stayed very firmly within one particular situation (Dale Farm) and never really extended the debate to cover our general responsibilities towards minority cultures or even viewpoints.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pink Betty on Oct 1, 2011 12:14:00 GMT
yes....but the gypos just nick our stuff when they come round here - so why should Basildon or any council enable them to inflict themselves on any honest tax paying community?
|
|
|
|
Post by ncsonde on Oct 1, 2011 19:07:33 GMT
It's part of their cultural tradition Bets. We must respect it. Maybe give grants and training programmes to promote and preserve it. What are you, a racist?
|
|
|
|
Post by bets on Oct 1, 2011 19:19:33 GMT
only if they're not shaggable  |
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Oct 2, 2011 12:08:54 GMT
Why should the gyppos make any effort to behave decently to society when society doesn't behave decently to them?
(Casual use of the word Gyppo is a part of this.)
|
|
|
|
Post by skylark on Nov 4, 2012 18:06:03 GMT
Yes. Basildon are breaking the law in not providing sites for travellers. . Many, if not most, of the travellers are Irish. Shouldn't it be up to Eire to make sure they have somewhere to live? If Britain has an obligation to house anyone who arrives claiming to be a traveller, God (or whatever) help us. |
|
|
|
Post by rjpageuk on Nov 5, 2012 14:02:03 GMT
I read a really interesting discussion re: drone attacks from a guy who is currently working for the RAF doing exactly this.
According to him the rules of engagement and the way the British use drone attacks is very different to the way the US do which result in far less civilian casualties.
In terms of morality I dont see the difference in pressing a button to get a drone to kill someone and firing a gun I think they are morally equivalent. It doesnt make sense to me to be ok with one and not the other.
|
|
jonjel
Madrigal Member 
Posts: 3,931
|
Post by jonjel on Nov 7, 2012 12:44:53 GMT
I recall being at a function and 'open' day a few years ago at a Govt research establishment. At lunch there was an army chaplain who was banging on about how disgusting it was to kill the enemy in the ways we had seen.
I leaned over and said 'If you believe it is morally right to kill people in some circumstances, and from your uniform that seems to be the case, then I can't see it matters that much how you do it.'
Lunch was a bit quiet after that.
|
|
jonjel
Madrigal Member
Posts: 3,931
|
Post by jonjel on Nov 7, 2012 14:32:31 GMT
I agree LMH. The point I was making was that no death is justifiable. A pretty difficult moral stance, but I am sure you get my point. The chaplain did.
I get rather cross when I see yet another obit from some commanding officer when some poor bastard has been turned into mince by a roadside bomb and the CO is telling us all that he died in the service of his country and was an outstanding example etc etc.
All the bloke really wanted to do was sit with his wife and kids and watch Eastenders.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjpageuk on Nov 9, 2012 10:42:58 GMT
I think I agree with you, I suppose the killing itself is no worse or better morally, but perhaps being able to distance oneself from the act causes some moral problems? ?? Maybe decisions are being affected by that extra distance? Maybe it's easier to take a risk that "civilians" might be killed? While I agree with your point, in reality I think drone attacks can actually do the opposite but of course it depends on how the rules of engagement are defined. But with drone attacks you generally have much better surveillance and understanding of what is in the local area and much more rarely have the need for an instinct based decision. |
|
jonjel
Madrigal Member
Posts: 3,931
|
Post by jonjel on Nov 9, 2012 11:53:54 GMT
It is a subject that we could discuss for ever, becasue there is not and never will be a solution. From the time when men first came out of the dark the guy with the biggest club, or the one who had mates with big clubs dominated.
As for the drones, well they are only as good (or bad) as the bloke in front of the TV monitor.
|
|
