Or as others might put it:-

“Free speech advocate agitates to be able to live in an echo chamber”.

It seems some don’t so much seek to ignore, because that’s already very easy to accomplish, but want to remove any possibility of seeing things they disagree with.

Feels like cowardice to me.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

One of the biggest problems is a lack of political and media representation for the right.

The other parties are only interested in quelling an uprising. They are well aware of the causes of the unrest, but choose to deny it.
This is happening across Europe, it's not an English or Irish nationalism thing.

People want less immigration. They are afraid for their children and themselves. They see their towns and cities being rapidly altered and had no say in the change. They see their way of life being eroded and their safety threatened.

Suddenly the politicians are worried about the safety of immigrants. Where was their concern for the rest of us? One of their own was killed and they did nothing. Members of our armed forces are under threat at home, they do nothing.

What would have to happen before they acknowledge the problem and do something?

I don't condone indiscriminate violence against people or property, but the unrepresented ordinary people have to make them listen somehow.
Terrorists with causes of all kinds have recognised this for decades.
Do we really have to get to a point where British people employ the tactics of terrorism before they listen?

I weep for this country.

I think that there could well be more widespread disturbances next weekend with large numbers of football supporters going here and there.

This is a complete distortion and misrepresentation of the situation.

It suggests the “right” speak for everyone, but they don’t. They speak only for themselves and they are a minority.

I have frequently argued that their voice needs to be heard and their ideas defeated by better ones, but that needs to be done via our democratic institutions. Not attempted in the streets. Maybe the big lesson of the last few days is that the need for PR has been made clearer.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

I saw that. The officer was defusing a situation. Would you prefer he inflamed it so a riot ensued and then people would have to be arrested? His job is to keep the peace.

I don’t recall if the term “Islamic extremists” was used but I would not have expected it to have been as there was no evidence they were. They weren’t rioting or using weapons to threaten. The potential for them to do so existed hence the need to defuse. Had they done so such a description would have been accurate, but not before. They could have been arrested and charged with possession of offensive weapons but to try to do so might have produced the very result that wasn’t wanted.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

The least they could have done is confiscate their woods.