Lily Allen

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Lily Allen

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 8 of 29 < 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 >

JohnyBoy 16 Oct 16 4.09pm
Originally posted by matt_himself I, like 88% of HOL posters, don't understand your point 91% of the time. Maybe if you used 21% more grammatically effective paragraphs, or 32% more cogent argument, you would be 53% more effective in getting your message across. Of course, that doesn't factor in the 78% of us who may think that you are a WUM, or the 47% who think you are simple and misguided or the 88% who fell asleep after reading 12% of your contributions. Maybe 88% of HOL posters have been misinformed 100%of the time...but that still leaves a good 12% who should be eligible to vote
Alert a moderator to this post

JohnyBoy

16 Oct 16 4.09pm

Originally posted by matt_himself

I, like 88% of HOL posters, don't understand your point 91% of the time. Maybe if you used 21% more grammatically effective paragraphs, or 32% more cogent argument, you would be 53% more effective in getting your message across.

Of course, that doesn't factor in the 78% of us who may think that you are a WUM, or the 47% who think you are simple and misguided or the 88% who fell asleep after reading 12% of your contributions.

Maybe 88% of HOL posters have been misinformed 100%of the time...but that still leaves a good 12% who should be eligible to vote

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 16 Oct 16 6.22pm
Originally posted by matt_himself I, like 88% of HOL posters, don't understand your point 91% of the time. Maybe if you used 21% more grammatically effective paragraphs, or 32% more cogent argument, you would be 53% more effective in getting your message across. Of course, that doesn't factor in the 78% of us who may think that you are a WUM, or the 47% who think you are simple and misguided or the 88% who fell asleep after reading 12% of your contributions. As usual, rather than answering the point you revert to type. Edited by nickgusset (16 Oct 2016 6.29pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 16 Oct 16 6.22pm

Originally posted by matt_himself

Of course, that doesn't factor in the 78% of us who may think that you are a WUM, or the 47% who think you are simple and misguided or the 88% who fell asleep after reading 12% of your contributions.

As usual, rather than answering the point you revert to type.

Edited by nickgusset (16 Oct 2016 6.29pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 17 Oct 16 9.51am
Originally posted by Spiderman First point.. there is a difference between asylum seekers/refugess and Economic Migrants. It is not our duty to take any Economic Migrant who wishes to live here. The Geneva Convention states that a refugee should seek asylum in the FIRST safe country they encounter.. And most do, however with the numbers displaced, and duration of displacement, we actively need to support that process, directly, at point in the camps, by taking refugees from those camps to alievate the suffering. Also by targeting the camps as your source, you have an infrastructure to allocate from, as well as somekind of record base to determine status from. Unsurprisingly, people aren't happy to live in a tent in a massively overpopulated camp, half run by criminal gangs and budding terrorist groups (Hezbollah and Hamas are notorious for operating in and out of refugee camps). Its unreasonable to expect that countries like Lebanon, Turkey, Greece and Jordan can realistically cope with the numbers (1/4 of the population of Lebanon are now refugees from Syria). Originally posted by Spiderman how many in the "jungle" have done this. Second point... there are the Official figures and then there are the correct figures!! I will leave you to think about this. Probably some, which is why we should target displacement camps, and direct refugees. Of course we do take all manner of economic migrants but that's a different matter - which I generally believe should only occur during periods of high, yield employment of the UK nationals (i.e. not to control wages in the UK, but to fulfil employment gaps). "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 17 Oct 16 9.51am

Originally posted by Spiderman

First point.. there is a difference between asylum seekers/refugess and Economic Migrants. It is not our duty to take any Economic Migrant who wishes to live here. The Geneva Convention states that a refugee should seek asylum in the FIRST safe country they encounter..

And most do, however with the numbers displaced, and duration of displacement, we actively need to support that process, directly, at point in the camps, by taking refugees from those camps to alievate the suffering. Also by targeting the camps as your source, you have an infrastructure to allocate from, as well as somekind of record base to determine status from.

Unsurprisingly, people aren't happy to live in a tent in a massively overpopulated camp, half run by criminal gangs and budding terrorist groups (Hezbollah and Hamas are notorious for operating in and out of refugee camps).

Its unreasonable to expect that countries like Lebanon, Turkey, Greece and Jordan can realistically cope with the numbers (1/4 of the population of Lebanon are now refugees from Syria).

Originally posted by Spiderman
how many in the "jungle" have done this.
Second point... there are the Official figures and then there are the correct figures!! I will leave you to think about this.

Probably some, which is why we should target displacement camps, and direct refugees. Of course we do take all manner of economic migrants but that's a different matter - which I generally believe should only occur during periods of high, yield employment of the UK nationals (i.e. not to control wages in the UK, but to fulfil employment gaps).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 17 Oct 16 10.08am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Seconded......If we had intervened heavily early on we may have avoided much of this miserly now. The left and a fair proportion on the right ended up enabling the space for Russia to come in and practically win this for Assad. The enabling of the enlargement of ISIS into a caliphate was a direct result of the withdraw of US troops and ally troops.....This was repeatedly called for by the left....But of course they take no responsibility for worsening an already bad situation by an alarming and massively costly degree. Truth is, after the example of Iraq and Libya, I think in terms of stability and Western interests, if we intervened, we should have done so on the behalf of Assad, who realistically are the only faction then and now, that could reasonably create a secure and stable Syria. Of course, the problem of the humanitarian crisis is compounded by the duration of the war, and a failure to provision from the camps periodically, rather than just ignoring the growing problem until it turned up on our doorsteps (not just the UK, everyone). I don't think 'our bombing' has particually added to the issue, or that were notably more responsible than anyone else for the refugee crisis. But we do have a duty to become part of the solution rather than compounding the problems. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 17 Oct 16 10.08am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Seconded......If we had intervened heavily early on we may have avoided much of this miserly now.

The left and a fair proportion on the right ended up enabling the space for Russia to come in and practically win this for Assad.

The enabling of the enlargement of ISIS into a caliphate was a direct result of the withdraw of US troops and ally troops.....This was repeatedly called for by the left....But of course they take no responsibility for worsening an already bad situation by an alarming and massively costly degree.

Truth is, after the example of Iraq and Libya, I think in terms of stability and Western interests, if we intervened, we should have done so on the behalf of Assad, who realistically are the only faction then and now, that could reasonably create a secure and stable Syria.

Of course, the problem of the humanitarian crisis is compounded by the duration of the war, and a failure to provision from the camps periodically, rather than just ignoring the growing problem until it turned up on our doorsteps (not just the UK, everyone).

I don't think 'our bombing' has particually added to the issue, or that were notably more responsible than anyone else for the refugee crisis. But we do have a duty to become part of the solution rather than compounding the problems.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 17 Oct 16 10.12am
Originally posted by nickgusset According to this respected American newspaper, the west are supporting Al quaeeda factions. [Link] Dunno how true it is but there's so much information / misinformation out there its difficult to make a reasonable judgement call. There are some factions related to the Al Nasu Front, which is an Al-Qaeda orientated faction, and likely some of the more fringe militias associated with the rebel factions that a Sunni, have some relationship to Al-Qaeda. But then technically so does IS, being itself a offshoot. it gets murky in a civil war, because factions will take arms and funding from whoever they can get it from. The priority tends to be on getting the stuff, rather than being 'true to the beliefs behind the providers' "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 17 Oct 16 10.12am

Originally posted by nickgusset

According to this respected American newspaper, the west are supporting Al quaeeda factions. [Link]
Dunno how true it is but there's so much information / misinformation out there its difficult to make a reasonable judgement call.

There are some factions related to the Al Nasu Front, which is an Al-Qaeda orientated faction, and likely some of the more fringe militias associated with the rebel factions that a Sunni, have some relationship to Al-Qaeda.

But then technically so does IS, being itself a offshoot. it gets murky in a civil war, because factions will take arms and funding from whoever they can get it from. The priority tends to be on getting the stuff, rather than being 'true to the beliefs behind the providers'

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

carlonoil Naples 17 Oct 16 10.12am
The UK Government, rather than reward those with the strength or money to make it to Calais, has put hundreds of millions of pounds into giving food, shelter and support to far more refugees in Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon. An approach that pop singers do not have to apologise for on behalf of the country. Edited by carlonoil (17 Oct 2016 10.20am)
Alert a moderator to this post

carlonoil

Naples 17 Oct 16 10.12am

The UK Government, rather than reward those with the strength or money to make it to Calais, has put hundreds of millions of pounds into giving food, shelter and support to far more refugees in Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon. An approach that pop singers do not have to apologise for on behalf of the country.

Edited by carlonoil (17 Oct 2016 10.20am)

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 17 Oct 16 1.10pm
Originally posted by carlonoil The UK Government, rather than reward those with the strength or money to make it to Calais, has put hundreds of millions of pounds into giving food, shelter and support to far more refugees in Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon. An approach that pop singers do not have to apologise for on behalf of the country. Edited by carlonoil (17 Oct 2016 10.20am) This is problematic as a solution, long term, as it doesn't resolve the issue of people spending years living in camps (including children) where functionality of a normal life, such as schooling etc isn't viable. UK asylum figures aren't really a problem, they've been below the national emigration figures for the last decade, and the history of refugees in terms of integration is generally pretty good. The problem has been, economic migration, notably from the EU for society. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 17 Oct 16 1.10pm

Originally posted by carlonoil

Edited by carlonoil (17 Oct 2016 10.20am)

This is problematic as a solution, long term, as it doesn't resolve the issue of people spending years living in camps (including children) where functionality of a normal life, such as schooling etc isn't viable.

UK asylum figures aren't really a problem, they've been below the national emigration figures for the last decade, and the history of refugees in terms of integration is generally pretty good. The problem has been, economic migration, notably from the EU for society.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 17 Oct 16 1.12pm
Also, as I realise I haven't said much about Lilly Allen, she can f**k off. She's not even remotely relevant or representative of the UK, beyond being a silly publicity chasing has been pop star of the lowest c list category. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 17 Oct 16 1.12pm

Also, as I realise I haven't said much about Lilly Allen, she can f**k off. She's not even remotely relevant or representative of the UK, beyond being a silly publicity chasing has been pop star of the lowest c list category.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

collier row eagle romford essex via another galaxy 17 Oct 16 1.19pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Also, as I realise I haven't said much about Lilly Allen, she can f**k off. She's not even remotely relevant or representative of the UK, beyond being a silly publicity chasing has been pop star of the lowest c list category. You forgot to mention slag
Alert a moderator to this post

collier row eagle

romford essex via another galaxy 17 Oct 16 1.19pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

You forgot to mention slag

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 17 Oct 16 1.26pm
Originally posted by collier row eagle You forgot to mention slag I think that's a bit harsh. I might use the term slag to describe someone I like... "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 17 Oct 16 1.26pm

Originally posted by collier row eagle

You forgot to mention slag

I think that's a bit harsh. I might use the term slag to describe someone I like...

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 17 Oct 16 2.04pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Also, as I realise I haven't said much about Lilly Allen, she can f**k off. She's not even remotely relevant or representative of the UK, beyond being a silly publicity chasing has been pop star of the lowest c list category. You would though. I would, but that's not an indictment, I'd bone anything. "It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"
Alert a moderator to this post

dannyh

wherever I lay my hat....... 17 Oct 16 2.04pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

You would though.

I would, but that's not an indictment, I'd bone anything.

"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 17 Oct 16 2.17pm
Originally posted by dannyh You would though. I would, but that's not an indictment, I'd bone anything. As poor little DanH will testify. Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham
Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt

Clapham on the Back 17 Oct 16 2.17pm

Originally posted by dannyh

You would though.

I would, but that's not an indictment, I'd bone anything.

As poor little DanH will testify.

Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 8 of 29 < 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Lily Allen

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors