# The Philippines disaster



## wizard (12 Nov 2013)

Is this an act of god! If it is gods will should we not just sit back and do nothing

Is it the planet saying there are too many people to support? And maybe we should do nothing and think ourselves lucky it’s not us.

Is it just a national disaster and we should do all we can to help


----------



## marcros (12 Nov 2013)

I think no 3 is the only rational option.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (12 Nov 2013)

Nice to see that a government that is prepared to spend tens of billions of borrowed pounds on a pointless railway line can afford ten million.


----------



## Mr_P (12 Nov 2013)

It might not feel like it but we are on of the richest economies on the planet and my ancestors and me are far more to blame than the average Tacloban if it is indeed down to global warming.

Dread to think the difference in my carbon footprint and theirs.

Even if it is a natural disaster, once in a thousand year type event we have a duty to help our fellow human beings.


----------



## cedarwood (12 Nov 2013)

Your carbon footprint ha these extracts taken from another forum

What % of CO2 do humans produce?
Respondent’s answers ranged from as high as 100% with most estimating it to be between 75% to 25% and only four said they thought it was between 10% and 2 %.

The Correct Answer: Nature produces nearly all of it. Humans produce only 3%. As a decimal it is a miniscule
0.001% of the air. All of mankind produces only one molecule of CO2 in around every 90,000 air molecules! Yes, that’s all.

Is CO2 is a pollutant?

Respondent’s Answers: All thought it was a pollutant, at least to some degree.

The Correct Answer: CO2 is a harmless, trace gas. It is as necessary for life - just as oxygen and nitrogen are. It is a natural gas that is clear, tasteless and odourless. It is in no way a pollutant.

Calling CO2 a ‘pollutant’ leads many to wrongly think of it as black, grey or white smoke. Because the media deceitfully show white or grey ‘smoke’ coming out of power station cooling towers, most think this is CO2. It is not: it’s just steam (water vapour) condensing in the air. CO2 is invisible: just breathe out and see. Look at it bubbling out of your soft drinks, beer or sparkling wine. No one considers that a pollutant - because it’s not. CO2 in its frozen state is commonly known as dry ice. It is used in camping eskys, in medical treatments and science experiments. No one considers that a pollutant either. CO2 is emitted from all plants. This ‘emission’ is not considered a pollutant even though this alone is 33 times more than man produces! Huge quantities of CO2 are dissolved naturally in the ocean and released from the warm surface. This is not considered a pollutant either.
Have you seen any evidence that CO2 causes a greenhouse effect?

Respondent’s Answers: Most did not know of any definite proof. Some said they thought the melting of the
Arctic and glaciers was possibly proof.

The Correct Answer: There is no proof at all. The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (the IPCC)
has never produced any proof. 

There is lots more but the fact is your carbon footprint has nothing to do with global warming its a myth put out by goverments to get us to pay more in TAXES


----------



## RogerS (12 Nov 2013)

Here we go again.


----------



## cedarwood (12 Nov 2013)

Should of also put this in my post, all these disasters are Natural Nature at work, we supposedly have lots more warning these days about whats coming our way weather wise and do what we can to minimize the danger.
In the end after its over WE should ALL do our bit to help those that are in need it.


----------



## Jacob (12 Nov 2013)

For cedarwoods benefit: 
Nobody ever said CO2 was a "pollutant". 
No it isn't harmless - in sufficient quantities in will kill you but that isn't the issue; in quite tiny quantities in the atmosphere it alters the heat balance through the greenhouse effect. If you want evidence for the greenhouse effect you just need to google away - it was known about 200 years ago in the laboratory. The atmospheric effects have been known about for 50 years or so.
Climate change theory says we should expect more severe weather events. That's what we are getting. They forecast a very high probability of more. When sufficient evidence accumulates that will constitute "proof". In the meantime, to ignore it is stupid. Whether or not anything can be done is another question.


----------



## wizard (12 Nov 2013)

we send aid to india and they build a rocket to mars
Drop food from planes yes send money and the rich will get richer


----------



## cedarwood (12 Nov 2013)

Jacob":2bl0bznk said:


> For cedarwoods benefit:
> Nobody ever said CO2 was a "pollutant".
> No it isn't harmless - in sufficient quantities in will kill you but that isn't the issue; in quite tiny quantities in the atmosphere it alters the heat balance through the greenhouse effect. If you want evidence for the greenhouse effect you just need to google away - it was known about 200 years ago in the laboratory. The atmospheric effects have been known about for 50 years or so.
> Climate change theory says we should expect more severe weather events. That's what we are getting. They forecast a very high probability of more. When sufficient evidence accumulates that will constitute "proof". In the meantime, to ignore it is stupid. Whether or not anything can be done is another question.



My point was that the human carbon footprint is minuscule compared to that of nature itself, it may well be the cause the "greenhouse effect" as a gas imbalance in the atmosphere, but some of the governments of this world and the EU in particular are using it as an excuse to tax us more.


----------



## Jacob (12 Nov 2013)

cedarwood":2wno3orn said:


> Jacob":2wno3orn said:
> 
> 
> > For cedarwoods benefit:
> ...


I think a few Filipinos would say western governments aren't taxing enough or doing enough.


----------



## JustBen (12 Nov 2013)

Jacob":x1w0uyfq said:


> cedarwood":x1w0uyfq said:
> 
> 
> > Jacob":x1w0uyfq said:
> ...



IF it is caused by humans, it's more likely the east than the west Particularly china.
It was only a few weeks ago that smog levels were so high, visibility was reduced to about 50ft(might be meters)


----------



## Jacob (12 Nov 2013)

benjimano":2pmnermi said:


> Jacob":2pmnermi said:
> 
> 
> > cedarwood":2pmnermi said:
> ...


It's a global problem. Per capita CO2 production is highest by far in USA with Europe not far behind. The Chinese have some way to go to catch up.


----------



## doctor Bob (12 Nov 2013)

benjimano":2r53tevz said:


> IF it is caused by humans, it's more likely the east than the west Particularly china.
> It was only a few weeks ago that smog levels were so high, visibility was reduced to about 50ft(might be meters)




Thats the attitude, if we are all going to die or become ill due pollution and greenhouse effect we can all be proud it wasn't our fault................................ ohhhhh hang on, didn't we used to create smogs and have massive industrial pollution


----------



## Jacob (12 Nov 2013)

Ozzies are worst according to this. Not surprised - it's all those barbies on the beach.


----------



## Mr_P (12 Nov 2013)

doctor Bob":27trmmur said:


> benjimano":27trmmur said:
> 
> 
> > IF it is caused by humans, it's more likely the east than the west Particularly china.
> ...




Yes we solved the problem with the clean air act and shifting manufacturing to the other side of the world. 

Len SEVEN from strictly was flogging his book the other day, the good old days in London doors left open, smog so bad you couldn't find your house.

Going a bit off topic here, these people are dead / injured, innocent, homeless, hungry and thirsty.


----------



## JustBen (12 Nov 2013)

doctor Bob":17qbasnh said:


> benjimano":17qbasnh said:
> 
> 
> > IF it is caused by humans, it's more likely the east than the west Particularly china.
> ...



Taken out of context. The comment was regarding tax.


----------



## RogerS (12 Nov 2013)

benjimano":l1zz2okk said:


> doctor Bob":l1zz2okk said:
> 
> 
> > benjimano":l1zz2okk said:
> ...



I cannot see any reference to tax in your original response. Your point was that China were the polluters. Yes..because as has already been said, we have exported our pollution to them as they make all our goods (more or less).


----------



## JustBen (12 Nov 2013)

benjimano":39iqynje said:


> Jacob":39iqynje said:
> 
> 
> > I think a few Filipinos would say western governments aren't taxing enough or doing enough.
> ...


----------



## markturner (12 Nov 2013)

I think the Chinese are very glad we have exported our pollution to them. It has enabled them to become the worlds pre eminent superpower while our country slowly slides down the pan.........

And while I don't want to be callous, we are obsessed as humans in trying to stop mother natures checks and balances on an massively overpopulated planet like disease and natural disasters - we can't and should not try and stop everyone dying all the time. There are not enough resources on this planet to support us all as it is. 

How much are you sending to help Jacob ? You could pretend you were paying 70% tax and send a few months salary if you feel so strongly.......imagine how smug you would feel..........


----------



## Phil Pascoe (12 Nov 2013)

This is a perfect opportunity for the government. All aid should be labour, machinery - water purifiers, JCBs and so on, the Army, doctors, sniffer dogs, medical and food supplies. Do some good for this country, don't just give Carlos Fandango random amounts of cash and tell him to spend it as he sees fit. Get some out of the cesspit that is Afghanistan, maybe.


I've just heard on Newsnight that of the money raised by large charities for Haiti 40% of money was spent on property and cars for aid workers, and 0.6% actually got to be spent "on the ground".


----------



## Jacob (12 Nov 2013)

markturner":1w8m2vfj said:


> .....
> How much are you sending to help Jacob ? You could pretend you were paying 70% tax and send a few months salary if you feel so strongly.......imagine how smug you would feel..........


I don't recall saying anything controversial in this thread which could account for your tasteless and moronic attempt at satire.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (12 Nov 2013)

I don't think it was intended as a moronic attempt at satire, just an insult.


----------



## Jacob (12 Nov 2013)

OK, moronic insult.


----------



## adidat (12 Nov 2013)

wizard":16ff7o5e said:


> Drop food from planes yes send money and the rich will get richer



this sounds about right disaster relief agencies actually bid for the disaster! crazy

a very reliable friend spent lots of time in liberia during their main troubles, now i realise this wasn't a natural disaster but due to his connection with the us gov he was taken to a runway and some hangars he said there was about 20 brand new off road vehicles land rovers maybe. They were just rotting in the african sun they had been there for years under guard along with 100's of tons of food and supplies just rotting in the hangars. All this paid for by other governments etc all wasted down to very poor management and the fat cats getting fatter!

and the skinning locals getting skinnier and dieing!

he did also see a gang shoot and rpg at mans house in monrovia! all because apparently he was a witch :shock: 

adidat


----------



## riclepp (13 Nov 2013)

The yanks have already started to send transport planes out to the Philippines to bring their staff out, guess what they are empty going in...what a waste of an aircraft...could have packed it with food, supplies, equipment etc...God bless the yanks, don't you just love em...twits....whoever invented the yanks must have been on something.


----------



## riclepp (13 Nov 2013)

markturner said:


> I think the Chinese are very glad we have exported our pollution to them. It has enabled them to become the worlds pre eminent superpower while our country slowly slides down the pan.........
> 
> And while I don't want to be callous, we are obsessed as humans in trying to stop mother natures checks and balances on an massively overpopulated planet like disease and natural disasters - we can't and should not try and stop everyone dying all the time. There are not enough resources on this planet to support us all as it is.
> 
> here here


----------



## Jacob (13 Nov 2013)

So you are pleased that a lot of people have died?


----------



## markturner (13 Nov 2013)

Actually, a lot of people have not died.......they may die or face a horrible time over the next few weeks, but no worse than great tranches of the human race in other countries and in other situations.....this is just the latest big news story....

You cant solve the worlds problems with socialism.......and if something did happen that reduced the worlds population by 40%...then would that be a bad thing? Looking at the big picture? And of course, eveybody hates the Americans...until they want their army and planes to fly the aid in..........

So, how much did you send? Oh no, I forgot, you just want the rich people to pay instead..............


----------



## Jonzjob (13 Nov 2013)

cedarwood":209slxa8 said:


> Your carbon footprint ha these extracts taken from another forum
> 
> What % of CO2 do humans produce?
> Respondent’s answers ranged from as high as 100% with most estimating it to be between 75% to 25% and only four said they thought it was between 10% and 2 %.
> ...



Cedarwood, I have been looking for this sort of info for ages on and off. Any chance of a link please?? Global warming is a part of the natural cycle that has been going on almost since the Earth was formed. As for CO2, all it would need to happen is another Krackatoa as happened in 1883 and we would have winters to remember for a very long time. As for the rising sea? How far did it go out since Sandwich was a port??? Or you could walk across to france???

In my opinion it wouldn't be needed for loads of people to die in natural catastrophies if the population were to be kept down by cutting down the number of babies bought into the world. 

Several generations ago in Africa families had a dozen or so babies because most of them were going to die, plus it was/is BIG macho for the bloke to be able to prove his manhood.

Now, the men are still proving their manhood, BUT the babies are living, growing up and unsupportable. The population is exploding and nature will set a balance whatever mankind tried to do. 

As for the poor perishers in the Phillipines, we will be sending a donation to the Croix Rouge.


----------



## MARK.B. (13 Nov 2013)

UNDISPUTED FACT - There HAS been a disaster in the Philippines.

PETTY arguments and name calling over who is at fault - God - Mankind - East or West serves little or no purpose at all.

If you want want to help those that have survived ( The Dead are beyond help ) for whatever reason and in whatever way you wish then do so.

If you don't want to help those that have survived for whatever reason then don't.


----------



## Mike.C (13 Nov 2013)

MARK.B.":2xlhtp5b said:


> UNDISPUTED FACT - There HAS been a disaster in the Philippines.
> 
> PETTY arguments and name calling over who is at fault - God - Mankind - East or West serves little or no purpose at all.
> 
> ...



=D> 

Cheers

Mike


----------



## Phil Pascoe (13 Nov 2013)

Jacob":3hd5z4at said:


> Ozzies are worst according to this. Not surprised - it's all those barbies on the beach.



That's a totally misleading graph - there are c.23 million Australians and c. 1,360 million Chinese. Of course their per capita emissions are at different ends of the scale. It doesn't mean the Australians pollute three and a half times more than the Chinese.


----------



## Jacob (13 Nov 2013)

phil.p":u9ztxdst said:


> ....... It doesn't mean the Australians pollute three and a half times more than the Chinese.


Yes it does. They are each averagely responsible for 3 1/2 times the CO2 production of an average individual Chinese. Nothing misleading about that except for those who don't know the meaning of "per capita".


----------



## Phil Pascoe (13 Nov 2013)

It is misleading as it implies that Australia causes three and a half times the pollution that China does - many people wouldn't notice the "per capita" (and many wouldn't know what it meant anyway), they just look at the height of the columns. Surely it matters more what a country produces than it does what every man woman and child does?


----------



## Jonzjob (13 Nov 2013)

China = 1.351 billion X 5.5

Australia = 22.68 million X 18.6

I wonder who is producing the most merde :? :? 

Possibly not the Aussies as a nation me-thinks?? :mrgreen:


----------



## markturner (13 Nov 2013)

He He....wait 10 years and see what that graph looks like............they are only just getting out of first gear.....not to mention the indians and the brazilians. 

It's only an extremely well developed and wealthy economy with years of industrial and social stability that can afford to put in place the measures required. ( Like us in Europe and the US) And even then, when it comes to paying for them, actually paying high fuel bills & Eco levies etc ( Don't forget labour declared last government that cheap fuel was at odds with stated eco policies...like fags see - make them expensive to discourage useage........) yet look what happens when someone tries to actually raise the money needed? All of a sudden you have milliband screaming about how unjust high fuel prices are, you could not make it up.... 

Everyone else in the developing world is desperately struggling at any cost to improve their lot - pollution and social responsibility are waaaaaay down the list of things they care about. They just want all those lovely western consumer products and they want them now!!!

It's the hypocrisy and double standards around all this I cant stand........


----------



## andersonec (13 Nov 2013)

Does anybody really believe the world will be able to sustain the human population expansion, the population growth is compounding ie 2 children have 4 kids who have 8 kids who have 16 kids and so on, Britain's population 100 years ago was circa 36 million, the 2011 census has the population down as 56.1 million (and that is after two world wars) so, 30 million increase in the UK alone, what goes hand in glove with this is what the scientists are saying is causing global warming? major manufacturing of goods to support this increasing population and most of that is junk, it is a fact that people are no happier now than they were in the fifties even though they now have all the modern technological gadgets designed to 'make life easier'
The economists keep on preaching about growth, the government keeps on preaching about growth, this is supposed to be able to keep up with the ever increasing population, here in Lincolnshire they need to produce 42,800 new houses in the next twenty years but!!!! the fact is, infinite growth is impossible and not sustainable, world population is approaching 7 BILLION and the UN predicts 10 BILLION by the year 2100 (that's bordering on double) where is the food, energy, water, resources etc coming from for all these people? (can you imagine the cars?) this planet certainly cannot produce it.

Andy


----------



## Karl (13 Nov 2013)

I thought the latest forecast showed that global population was to stop growing in about 20/30 years time and would start to decline?


----------



## JustBen (13 Nov 2013)

Karl":333ltfxs said:


> I thought the latest forecast showed that global population was to stop growing in about 20/30 years time and would start to decline?



Is that at the point where we hit maximum planet capacity and start killing each other for space/resources?


----------



## riclepp (15 Nov 2013)

Jacob":2dndeg9c said:


> So you are pleased that a lot of people have died?




Again Jacob, you have only read and interperated what you want to.

Fact:

This planet we live on has a dwindling finite amount of resources.

Humans, abuse and difile this planet (depite all the so called packs governments sign up to)

This planet will die due to human destruction one way or another.

Humans don't care what they do to get their bundles of cash and get one upmanship (in general)

Oceans are now being recorded as becoming more acidic- this has a derogotory effect on all life and aicd water means no water to drink, to water plants and crops in turn means no food and no food means starvation and death to all life.

To be honest Jacob, no I don't really care for them (and this does not imply that I am pleased that many have died as you suggest) , just as they proberly don't care for us. Would they help the UK if the tables were turned??????

As has been pointed out, there are too many people already living on this planet, that is already unstainable to support. Humans can not and will never beat Mother Nature, if it didn't happen in the Philipines it would have happened elsewhere. And before you ask, yes I give to charity, for animals and the RBL. I generaly never give to disaster charities as some of the money always gets lost or the people don't get what they need when they need it. Maybe a harsh outlook, but it is mine and no I don't expect people to go along with my views!


----------



## Jacob (15 Nov 2013)

riclepp":30jzv3xy said:


> ..... Would they help the UK if the tables were turned??????
> 
> .....


I expect they would - it's human nature isn't it? Though, clearly, not everybody knows this!
In fact there are a few people (on this forum) with whom it would probably not be good to share a lifeboat - you'd have to keep an eye on them and perhaps dump them over the side at the first opportunity, for the common good!


----------



## cedarwood (15 Nov 2013)

Jacob":1h7shpeb said:


> riclepp":1h7shpeb said:
> 
> 
> > ..... Would they help the UK if the tables were turned??????
> ...


oooooo all together now throw jacob over the side he he :lol: :lol:


----------



## joethedrummer (15 Nov 2013)

Thought for a while ? 
Just received in todays mail a letter from Oxfam suggesting I might send some cash thro" them to the people of the Phillipines who are caught up the typhoon ,,Good as this maybe, there cannot be many people on their circulation list that are not already aware of the situation,, why did they not divert that asset to those stricken ? Thinking perhaps 2 or 3 million letters at the current postage rate equals a lot of clean water ?


----------



## Phil Pascoe (15 Nov 2013)

Lots of people's wages depend on the behemoths that are huge charities - I wouldn't waste any time waiting for them to do anything sensible.


----------



## joethedrummer (15 Nov 2013)

phil.p":3pjpc8te said:


> Lots of people's wages depend on the behemoths that are huge charities - I wouldn't waste any time waiting for them to do anything sensible.


Phil.,,,
It"s too late,,
We have sent some cash to friends in Manilla to "shortcut" the system,, Oh dear ,international currency transfer and all that,,and we don"t care about the wages of those employed by the behemoths,,


----------



## Jacob (15 Nov 2013)

A lot of gloomy negative thinking in this thread. 
Oxfam is a highly organised and efficient charity and you can be sure that the mail-out has been tested and found cost effective.
Send some money to Oxfam it might make you feel better!


----------



## joethedrummer (15 Nov 2013)

Jacob":36go8zdx said:


> A lot of gloomy negative thinking in this thread.
> Oxfam is a highly organised and efficient charity and you can be sure that the mail-out has been tested and found cost effective.
> Send some money to Oxfam it might make you feel better!


Jacob,
Its too late "cos our contribution has been received in Manilla and will be at the "front" by monday,,we couldn"t feel better thank you


----------



## heatherw (15 Nov 2013)

Here is a letter from Yab Seno, the Climate Commisioner for the Phillipìnes. I find it very moving and feel that this man is a loving caring person, not just looking out for his family but for his nation and all of humanity - not qualities that I would attribute to government members closer to home. Not only so, but he appears to have hope for humanity, which is a refreshing point of view nowadays.

I didn't realise until this morning that the strength of this typhoon is attributable to climate change, and that there is a climate change summit in Warsaw at this moment which noone is taking any notice of - it seems that Australia has not even sent a junior minister. 

_Dear friends,

Last weekend’s Super Typhoon Haiyan made landfall in my family’s hometown. The devastation is so staggering, that I’m struggling to find words to describe how I feel about the losses and damages we have suffered from this.

I spent two days agonizing over the fate of my relatives. But when I finally reached my brother, it filled me with renewed strength and great relief. He survived the onslaught, and for the last few days, he has been helping gather dead bodies. He is hungry and weary as food supplies find it difficult to arrive in the hardest hit areas.

But beyond the colossal humanitarian challenge ahead, we must take the courage to face the truth: the superstorm was not just another natural disaster -- it was made stronger and more deadly by human-caused climate change. For too long, those countries with the greatest capacity to act and greatest responsibility for the problem have shirked their obligations to cut pollution as the science demands. That has locked-in climate change, and could lock-in even worse impacts to come.

So I’ve taken a rare step as a public servant -- I’ve gone beyond the usual conventions to start an Avaaz petition. I’m appealing to Avaaz members to stand in solidarity with the people of the Philippines and all victims of climate change worldwide. Together our voices can push the governments meeting at the UN climate summit happening now to ratchet up pollution controls and help poorer communities with funding.

The question that will determine our survival is: can humanity rise to the occasion? I still believe we can. Sign the petition today, and forward it to everyone, and I will deliver it personally at the talks.

Yeb Sano, Climate Commissioner for the Philippines and the government’s lead negotiator at the the Warsaw climate talks _

If anyone would like to sign Yeb's petition the link is here http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/Stand_with_the_Philippines/?sFsjXab,


----------



## markturner (15 Nov 2013)

Jacob":fpvp7kbt said:


> riclepp":fpvp7kbt said:
> 
> 
> > ..... Would they help the UK if the tables were turned??????
> ...




:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Do you seriously , really believe that statement Jacob ????????? Really ??? Generally, no one in the 3rd world would give a second thought to our misfortunes............why should they? Unless they had family here...which I imagine a huge number do......but that's a different thread.....


----------



## Jacob (15 Nov 2013)

markturner":2woop25p said:


> Jacob":2woop25p said:
> 
> 
> > riclepp":2woop25p said:
> ...


"If the tables were turned" was the expression. A big"if" but yes I do believe it.
You obviously have a dim view of mankind - luckily not shared by all. Do you read the DM or the Telegraph?


----------



## riclepp (15 Nov 2013)

It appears Jacob that you are a blind, misguided fool that looks through rose tinted glasses. Most of the world only likes the UK when it gets cash from us, when there is no cash available then they condem and slag us off!!!!!


----------



## Phil Pascoe (15 Nov 2013)

He's obviously not a Grauniad reader. What's wrong with criticising the Mail today, then? :lol:


----------



## doctor Bob (15 Nov 2013)

riclepp":vfcd3iu6 said:


> It appears Jacob that you are a blind, misguided fool that looks through rose tinted glasses. Most of the world only likes the UK when it gets cash from us, when there is no cash available then they condem and slag us off!!!!!



I think the UK is held in very high esteem overseas. If anything, the people of third world countries are completely misguided about the UK believing it to be full of country gents and lunching ladies.
I've been to Asia and never heard anyone condemn and slag of the UK.

I'd like to think if a natural disaster struck the UK that people would help out. the people of the Philippines were desperately poor before this tragedy, this disaster will affect a generation without our help.


----------



## Jacob (15 Nov 2013)

riclepp":3q6u26yj said:


> It appears Jacob that you are a blind, misguided fool that looks through rose tinted glasses. Most of the world only likes the UK when it gets cash from us, when there is no cash available then they condem and slag us off!!!!!


It appears riclepp you are probably a Daily Mail reader (or something similar). 
It's both a cause and symptom of a gloomy misanthropic view of the world. Symptom in that the victims seek out the bad news (they get some sort of inner satisfaction from it), cause in that the papers confirm it and amplify it - a positive feedback cycle leading to ever deeper misanthropy.
You can step away from it but the cure often isn't easy. Realising that not everybody shares their miserable view of the world is one of the first steps. One step at a time! :lol:


----------



## markturner (16 Nov 2013)

'


----------



## markturner (16 Nov 2013)

If I read a paper, it would probably be the Telegraph, or the Times, as I am unapologetically more right wing than left wing in my views - well, let me clarify that statement, I am more anti left wing - and I cant stand the constant propaganda you get in most of the press. I don't now, I find it is bad for my blood pressure :lol: and also the wife does not let me, as something generally sets me off........ Seriously, there is so much going on in the world that I find deeply disturbing I would rather not read the slanted reporting of it. 

For example: the Guardians pathetic attempts at justifying publishing classified information that has probably saved countless lives in thwarted terrorist attacks as being in the public interest........

The way that during the Iraq & Afghanistan war, every possible negative slant was put on things - that war was lost by the media, way before the politicians squandered the lives of hundreds of our brave troops in pointless "hearts and minds" operations that gained nothing, when the situation could have been better managed from the air. We should be supporting our troops, not hindering them.

The relentless refusal to accept that the slow dilution of our culture by multiculturalism & Islamification of this country is threat to our future and way of life.......

I could go on....

However, I am no bigot, or irrational loony. I just think this country should look after its own before we try looking after the rest of the world, that people who move here should have jobs, speak the language and integrate into our society, and that hard work and enterprise should rewarded in the same way that laziness and fecklessness should not. I have many Muslim and immigrant friends and workers, not to mention black and also gay friends. So not your stereotypical right winger. However, i think we should ask the question, at which percentage of immigration should we say enough? When 30% of this country is Muslim or black or asian? 50%? 70%? 90% ? Then we wont be England anymore and that's wrong....

So, I listen to Radio 4 for my news and current affairs. That annoys me as well on occasion, but generally not as much.....


----------



## Jacob (16 Nov 2013)

markturner":1muz93xg said:


> ...........
> The relentless refusal to accept that the slow dilution of our culture by multiculturalism & Islamification of this country is threat to our future and way of life.......
> 
> .......
> However, I am no bigot, ...........


Hmm. 
Reminds me of the often heard expression "I am not a racist, but.....(don't like dark skinned people etc. etc.)"
What is a bigot, in your view? :lol:


----------



## Phil Pascoe (16 Nov 2013)

Bigot? I've just looked it up. "Someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats or views other people with fear, distrust, hatred or intolerance" - Fits you perfectly, Jacob. :lol:


----------



## markturner (16 Nov 2013)

I would say" a person who is irrationally prejudiced against anothers creed, sexual orientation or politics, usually on the basis of ignorance or unfounded ideas"


However, let me also say, I could not care less what anyone else thinks of my opinions views etc....... I know I am a decent human being, and that's all that is important. So, if you want to think of me as a bigot, because it suits your world view, knock yourself out.........thats another thing that annoys me - anyone who is even slightly opposed to mass immigration or worried about the rise of Islam is automatically a racist & bigot....

If I was a bigot, would I have loads of gay friends? Would I have several black friends? Would I employ Muslims & immigrants? Would I live in central London? 

Controlled immigration is good, so is a bit of multiculturalism, its great for our culture...but its all gone too far and its too late to shut the door now.


----------



## Jacob (16 Nov 2013)

markturner":2b6nraz6 said:


> I would say" a person who is irrationally prejudiced against anothers creed, sexual orientation or politics, usually on the basis of ignorance or unfounded ideas".....


_The relentless refusal to accept that the slow dilution of our culture by multiculturalism & Islamification of this country is threat to our future and way of life......._

The above doesn't make any sense and a feeble attempt to rationalise prejudices doesn't make any difference - you are still a bigot. But congratulations on feeling that you _should_ attempt to rationalise them and look for excuses!


----------



## RogerS (16 Nov 2013)

You are spot on there, Mark. I used to frequent the For 3.org forum (Friends of Radio 3) but as the politics and current affairs thread has a group of leftie bully-boys, anyone who has the temerity to disagree with their facile Citizen Smith worldview is bludgeoned with snide remarks, branded a racist, a bigot etc and yet they - by their bullyboy tactics - are the very epitome of bigotry. 

What also sticks in my craw is that every year one of them comes out with a diatribe about Remembrance Day and the Poppy Appeal with some of the nastiest vile comments you can imagine. Cowardly..hiding behind the anonymity of the internet. I would dearly love to know his real name and where he lives so that we could continue our discussions face to face.

Edit: I had to add a space between the for and 3 as i've blocked the wretched site in my router!

Edit 2: Mark, you will also realise why I put Jacob on Ignore.


----------



## Max Power (16 Nov 2013)

As terrible as this natural event is for the people involved it would be classed as nature acting to keep numbers in check if it concerned animals.
The fact is that much of the world is producing too many offspring, and where this policy may have made sense when infant mortality was far higher, its now leading to an unchecked population explosion.
You need look no further than our own borders to see this with birth rates amongst third world immigrants far outpacing the birth rates of the indigenous population
Too late for London Mark as ethnic British are well in the minority there and many other cities will follow suit, Jacob may be a huge fan of multiculturalism but in reality its nothing less than ethnic cleansing.


----------



## Jacob (16 Nov 2013)

Odd that a thread about a human catastrophe has turned into a miserable bigot-fest.


----------



## Max Power (16 Nov 2013)

I ll take British culture anyday Jacob in preference to your vision of Utopia aka multiculturalism. Cultures that routinely subject little girls to mutilation or pack them off abroad against their will to be married before theyve given up playing with dolls are of no interest to me


----------



## Jacob (16 Nov 2013)

The good news is that the British tax payer is giving £50 million in aid so far.


----------



## markturner (16 Nov 2013)

Bigotfest..... lol............Like I said Jacob, I could not care less what you think..........call me what you like.........I sleep easy in my bed.


----------



## Jacob (16 Nov 2013)

markturner":2rf0jyw4 said:


> ...........I sleep easy in my bed.


Well done, what with all those foreigners and muslims milling about outside. :lol: :lol:


----------



## markturner (17 Nov 2013)

Oh dear, what will I do in the morning when I go to work?

Let me see, I employ 20 people, at least half of them are muslims and 70% of them foreigners.

Surely some strange dichotomy here?


----------



## Max Power (17 Nov 2013)

Jacob what is it that is so vehemently wrong with the culture, that has given more to the world than any other that you would have it eradicated in preference to your third world multi cultural mish mash of ideologies.
You obviously feel so strongly about it that anyone who declares the slightest preference for their own British culture is immediately declared either a racist , a bigot or both


----------



## markturner (17 Nov 2013)

Well said......


----------



## Jacob (17 Nov 2013)

markturner":1nr3q0su said:


> Oh dear, what will I do in the morning when I go to work?
> 
> Let me see, I employ 20 people, at least half of them are muslims and 70% of them foreigners.
> 
> Surely some strange dichotomy here?


The dichotomy is that you are not resisting 
_the relentless refusal to accept that the slow dilution of our culture by multiculturalism & Islamification of this country is threat to our future and way of life_ (your quote) 
but instead you are encouraging it by employing a large proportion of them.
Good for them, good for the economy, good for you too presumably, but somewhat hypocritical.


----------



## RogerS (17 Nov 2013)

LOL......had to peek to see what old Jacob was mithering about this time. 

I see he has invoked Rule 2 from the Citizen Smith 'How to argue' pamphlet and I quote "Rule 2. When on the back foot, introduce a red herring or come in with a total non-sequitur to the line of discussion in a vain attempt to confuse."


----------



## Jacob (17 Nov 2013)

Roger please just put me back on "ignore" it's much better that way!


----------



## RogerS (17 Nov 2013)

Jacob":1surxl64 said:


> Roger please just put me back on "ignore" it's much better that way!



Oh no...too much fun at the moment. Love seeing you on the back foot.


----------



## JustBen (17 Nov 2013)

Jacob":28cza4rq said:


> markturner":28cza4rq said:
> 
> 
> > ...........I sleep easy in my bed.
> ...



Why did you single out Muslims?


----------



## Jacob (17 Nov 2013)

benjimano":gnn5m4st said:


> Jacob":gnn5m4st said:
> 
> 
> > markturner":gnn5m4st said:
> ...


Because Mark has expressed his fear of other cultures and Islam:
"The relentless refusal to accept that the slow dilution of our culture by multiculturalism & Islamification of this country is threat to our future and way of life"

He didn't say anything about Mormons, Methodists etc etc who are just as much threat IMHO i.e. not at all.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 Nov 2013)

So you're not worried about the Mormons and the Methodists drugging and raping little girls (and mutilating their own), bombing underground stations and buses and inciting riots, then? Those Quakers, they're the worst of the lot!!


----------



## Jacob (17 Nov 2013)

No, nor the muslims - they are mostly as horrified by these sorts of things as you and I. 
Horrible things go one in the name of all religions it seems, except possibly the Quakers. Unitarians aren't too bad. Terrorism goes on under all sorts of flags. Nobody has a monopoly.

And why has a Philippines disaster thread set off this bigot-fest?


----------



## markturner (17 Nov 2013)

LOL....keep digging that hole jacob.............

This is like shooting fish in a barrel........


----------



## stevebuk (17 Nov 2013)

its a shame this post has yet again come to the lets slag off Jacob thread, if most of you actually read what the chap wrote instead of just wanting a slanging match you may realise he has his opinions too, failing that i suggest you all put him on ignore like others have..


----------



## Phil Pascoe (17 Nov 2013)

We actually do read what Jacob writes, and we know he has his opinions too.


----------



## markturner (17 Nov 2013)

No one has "slagged him off""........

read carefully.... .....

if anything, he has been the one throwing the insults....let me see...moronic, bigot, ignorant, hypocrite are but a few of his personal attacks on me. It does not bother me but its pretty strange you cant see whats typed out in front of you.....

I simply pointed out the flaws in his student ranting......


----------



## Jacob (17 Nov 2013)

Thanks for that Steve. But it's OK I'm used to being slagged off. 
Sometimes in threads like this I get the impression that some people have never heard opinions expressed much different from their own so it come as a bit of a shock to them, and anyway it's good practice for when I get down the pub!


----------



## heatherw (17 Nov 2013)

Your local must be a lively spot, Jacob, I must drop in next time I'm in Matlock Bath.


----------



## riclepp (18 Nov 2013)

stevebuk":3hlfo4w1 said:


> its a shame this post has yet again come to the lets slag off Jacob thread, if most of you actually read what the chap wrote instead of just wanting a slanging match you may realise he has his opinions too, failing that i suggest you all put him on ignore like others have..




Alas Steve, Jacob is a maker of the percieved responses as usual, rather than having an intelligent and grown up two way conversation; Jacob always belittles everyones eles opions and thoughts for the betterment of his own ideals. If I remember there was a German who did that in the 20th Centry and just looked at what happened there.

Jacob, insists the we should be nice to one another and all live holding hands and sing Kumbyar around the camp fire which is fine and that is what he believes in (good luck to him on that one). But, as others have pointed out on numerous times in this thread, that won't happen as long as man draws breath; rather than saying "ok I respect your view point, could you explaine why you think that way" or something along those lines, he starts to belittle other peoples thoughts and dictate others. When people question his "Facts (Austrilia V's China) he starts to redicule them, rather than open adult dialouge, he resorts to scallding people for the benefit of his point. So yes, I do believe that other forum members do read his posts and take on board his opinions.

He did this on another forum to the point of almopst saying " he would wee on Lady Thatchers Grave" and he wonders why he got banned there. Rightly or wrongley she was someones mother, wife and Grandmother to someone. But his sentiments were the same there as he is now using on this forum.

I for one, do bite sometimes, as I believe he is only content when he creates chaos and poor dialouge, regardless of who it is. I also believe that he is a sad, lonley, pathetic old man. I do not think for one moment that he would say anything to someones face as he does on the net. That is my personal belief as he has not done anything to dispute that belief. So I don't think people are "slagging of Jacob par sey", just fed up whith his online attitude and lack of ability to have a rational conversation with out resorting to name calling and insulting people by using old fashioioned words, that people don't generally use in everyday conversation that are proberly not in true context of the conversation being had. I wonder if Jacob looks them up before putting them into the conversation????

Anyway Steve, that is my take on things, and yes you do have right to your own opinions, just like we all do.


----------



## wizard (18 Nov 2013)

i was talking to someone from the Philippines at the weekend and they were not the slightest bit bothered about it.


----------



## Jacob (18 Nov 2013)

Riclepp's post too long to answer in detail. 
Riclepp you will just have to accept that on a public forum you will bump into opinions different from your own. That's the whole idea, you shouldn't be surprised.
What's this about peeing on maggie's grave - is there still a long queue? :lol: 
Old fashioned words - do you mean "per capita"? It's Latin but quite commonly used. It means "per person" or literally "per head".


----------



## markturner (18 Nov 2013)

Oh lordy.......

Strange how you have nothing to say when someone demolishes your responses as the naive and childish opinions they really are....or comes back at you with a answer that simply disproves utterly something you just said....

I bet you are quite the big man holding forth at the bar in the pub.........it would be worth the trip just to see you in full swing. Second thoughts, I could get more sense from listening to my dog.......


----------



## Jacob (18 Nov 2013)

markturner":12bnso49 said:


> ....someone demolishes your responses .......or comes back at you with a answer that simply disproves utterly something you just said.......


Er, can't say I noticed either of these things.


----------



## riclepp (18 Nov 2013)

Jacob":yju1xa1e said:


> Riclepp you will just have to accept that on a public forum you will bump into opinions different from your own. That's the whole idea, you shouldn't be surprised.
> 
> Perhaps you should look at this statement of yours and put it into practice then Jacob.
> 
> ...


----------



## Jacob (18 Nov 2013)

riclepp":2ichbsm8 said:


> Jacob":2ichbsm8 said:
> 
> 
> > Riclepp you will just have to accept that on a public forum you will bump into opinions different from your own. That's the whole idea, you shouldn't be surprised.
> ...


News to me. I don't think I've ever been banned for being rude about Thatcher. Perhaps you don't realise that a lot of people don't hold Thatcher in high regard and see her (and neo liberalism etc) as a disaster. That's what I mean about different opinions - for some of us being dis-respectful of maggie is perfectly OK and all she deserves. You might ask yourself why - this is a forum and these things get discussed - that's the whole point!


----------



## bugbear (18 Nov 2013)

Jacob":35jfpefq said:


> I don't think I've ever been banned for being rude about Thatcher.



Although various forums *have* banned you, in some case repeatedly having given you a second chance to behave.

Have you ever wondered why that is?

BugBear


----------



## riclepp (18 Nov 2013)

Jacob":uuyc5122 said:


> riclepp":uuyc5122 said:
> 
> 
> > Jacob":uuyc5122 said:
> ...




I agree that is the point of a forum, however there is absolutly no need for insulting people, being crass or rude. Which I am sorry to say appears to be your deminor (to me anyway, as it would be wrong of me to suggest others think that way). And yes you did get banned from the Haven for extreme comments, insulting people and such like. Don't forget it is still in the public domain for all to see. So why dont you chill out and be more relaxed, and possibly more people will take less offence at what you say....just a thought..... :shock: :shock: :shock:

By the way I am not going to get drawn into a discussion about Maggie as that is not really what this thread is about is it. If I remember rightly it is about the Philipienes and I have said my bit on that..... :wink:


----------



## Max Power (18 Nov 2013)

" And yes you did get banned from the Haven " 
:shock: Blimey Richard I thought you were referring to his no longer being welcome on woodwork uk.


----------



## riclepp (18 Nov 2013)

Max Power":34abdvpb said:


> " And yes you did get banned from the Haven "
> :shock: Blimey Richard I thought you were referring to his no longer being welcome on woodwork uk.




Oh dear that's not another one :shock: :shock:


----------



## Jacob (18 Nov 2013)

riclepp":234pdd7f said:


> Jacob":234pdd7f said:
> 
> 
> > riclepp":234pdd7f said:
> ...


Er can I have a link?I don't remember any of this. As far as I recall it was about laughing at turners calling urns "hollow forms". I might have been rude about Prince charley but let face it who isn't? :lol: :lol:


> So why dont you chill out and be more relaxed, and possibly more people will take less offence at what you say....just a thought..... :shock: :shock: :shock:


You aren't aware of how offensive some of the comments on this thread are, to me and possibly others. But anyway I'm not that bothered about people taking offence. I feel quite relaxed about it.


> By the way I am not going to get drawn into a discussion about Maggie as that is not really what this thread is about is it. If I remember rightly it is about the Philipienes and I have said my bit on that..... :wink:


So why did you bring maggie into it? I certainly didn't. :shock: I try not to think about the crazy old bat!


----------



## riclepp (18 Nov 2013)

Jacob

Once I have posted this I am going to block you so I don't have to read anymore of your inept drivel. Without a shadow of doubt you are a complete and utter wanker whose sole purpose is to wind people up and knock one out as you get off on it. Years ago, in my Battalion when had a twit just like you and boy did he get his comeuppance, plus a small spell in hospital, that is no less than what you deserve as you go out of your way to irritae people.

Have a good life you sad and pathetic old man!


----------



## wizard (18 Nov 2013)

Is it my imagination or has my post been hijacked


----------



## riclepp (19 Nov 2013)

Hi Wizard

Did try to get it back on track, but someone didn't want to get it back on track :?(


----------



## markturner (19 Nov 2013)

Jacob":1w96w5kd said:


> markturner":1w96w5kd said:
> 
> 
> > ....someone demolishes your responses .......or comes back at you with a answer that simply disproves utterly something you just said.......
> ...




Dont worry, everyone else did........

Nice one Richard...!


----------

