Atherstone Fire - all what is wrong with britain today

[detective-boy]

Ahhhh yes, the two are directly comparable aren't they? You're being a dick db. Again.

Read the thread.

 

[Blagsta]

Read the thread.

Yeah I have. In what way are this situation and the shooting of de Menezes comparable?

 

[detective-boy]

In what way exactly?

They are asked to go into situations which they have no way of perfectly predicting, at short notice, perhaps with insufficient resources or support. They are presented with situations where they believe people's lives may be in danger and they have a split second to make a decision. So they do the best they can. And sometimes things go wrong. But they have probably / usually done their best. They will be answerable for their decisions and, if there is sufficient evidence, they will be put before the Courts.

Unless you acknowledge that you are applying double standards and hypocrisy.

 

[detective-boy]

Yeah I have. In what way are this situation and the shooting of de Menezes comparable?

Read the thread (fucking annoying, isn't it?)

 

[Deareg]

They are asked to go into situations which they have no way of perfectly predicting, at short notice, perhaps with insufficient resources or support. They are presented with situations where they believe people's lives may be in danger and they have a split second to make a decision. So they do the best they can. And sometimes things go wrong. But they have probably / usually done their best.

Unless you acknowledge that you are applying double standards and hypocrisy.

that is fair enough and understandable, but why do they so often feel the need to tell lies and blacken the character of any victims of their blunders?

 

[Blagsta]

They are asked to go into situations which they have no way of perfectly predicting, at short notice, perhaps with insufficient resources or support. They are presented with situations where they believe people's lives may be in danger and they have a split second to make a decision. So they do the best they can. And sometimes things go wrong. But they have probably / usually done their best. They will be answerable for their decisions and, if there is sufficient evidence, they will be put before the Courts.

Unless you acknowledge that you are applying double standards and hypocrisy.

Granted. However, the fire service and the police serve very different functions in society. Last time I checked, the fire service did not carry weapons, have to judge whether they should shoot or not, could not deprive people of their liberty, did not have a track record of corruption and do not have a political purpose. Now given all that, in what way are these situations comparable?

 

[Blagsta]

Read the thread (fucking annoying, isn't it?)

It is. However, you have not actually answered the point put to you, so it's a bit pointless asking me to read the thread isn't it?

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

They are asked to go into situations which they have no way of perfectly predicting, at short notice, perhaps with insufficient resources or support. They are presented with situations where they believe people's lives may be in danger and they have a split second to make a decision. So they do the best they can. And sometimes things go wrong. But they have probably / usually done their best.

Unless you acknowledge that you are applying double standards and hypocrisy.

If in the Demenzies incident, four cops had been killed - that would be comparable, if in the firefighters case it had been the suspected (but innocent) arsonist - that would be comparable.

As it is, four firefighters lost died trying to ensure the safety of the public; while in the Demenzies incident, one young man died while officers shot at him at close range then tried to spin their way out of it by basically leaking (false) information that he was a bad un anyway.

 

[butchersapron]

They are asked to go into situations which they have no way of perfectly predicting, at short notice, perhaps with insufficient resources or support. They are presented with situations where they believe people's lives may be in danger and they have a split second to make a decision. So they do the best they can. And sometimes things go wrong. But they have probably / usually done their best. They will be answerable for their decisions and, if there is sufficient evidence, they will be put before the Courts.

Unless you acknowledge that you are applying double standards and hypocrisy.

I get it - unless you agree with db 100% on JCDM (inlcuding his ridiculous claim that there were no smear attempts) then you cannot comment on anything else that he sulkingly deems to be directly analogous (despite the massive differences being apparent to all) unless you publically make your agreement with him on the JCDM case clear. Failure to do so means that he's then within his rights to piss all over your thread.

Fuck me, this is truly pathetic. No wonder you sometimes get unwarrented grief on here. Pathetic

 

[detective-boy]

It is. However, you have not actually answered the point put to you, so it's a bit pointless asking me to read the thread isn't it?

I have. Read the thread. (I must admit it's actually quite amusing from this side though ... I can see what attracts you to it ... )

 

[detective-boy]

... but why do they so often feel the need to tell lies and blacken the character of any victims of their blunders?

That is an example of my point. It is taken as stereotypical ... when it isn't anything more than a relatively rare occurence. It is assumed it is the case, without any evidence and, often, in the face of evidence to the contrary.

It is, purely and simply, the application of double standards and hypocrisy.

 

[detective-boy]

Now given all that, in what way are these situations comparable?

You don't even have to read the thread for that one. Just read the post you quoted.

(Actually I'm sure you know perfectly well how they are comparable. It's just that there is no way on God's earth that you will ever admit that I have a point...)

 

[detective-boy]

If in the Demenzies incident, four cops had been killed - that would be comparable, if in the firefighters case it had been the suspected (but innocent) arsonist - that would be comparable.

Of course.

But that is not important for the gist of my point: if the police were involved (a) everyone would be the worlds best policing expert, queueing up to shout about how they'd fucked it up (with no evidence whatsoever), (b) be claiming that anyone who actually had any personal knowledge or experience of the situation was just being an "apologist" and (c) the stereotype of incompetent / violent / racist wankers would be liberally applied at the slightest opportunity.

The bottom line is that all members of all the emergency service spend the vast majority of their time doing their best to do the right thing. That some of all the emergency services sometimes do stupid things. That some of them make genuine mistakes which could, especially with hindsight, have been avoided.

They should all be treated in a consistent fashion.

That is not the case here. Some posters apply double standards based on their prejudices. Fact.

 

[Blagsta]

I have. Read the thread. (I must admit it's actually quite amusing from this side though ... I can see what attracts you to it ... )

You're not going to answer then?

 

[detective-boy]

I get it

No. You don't. (or, more likely, you do but you can't bring yourself to acknowledge I have a point.

Pathetic

Yes. You are.

 

[Blagsta]

You don't even have to read the thread for that one. Just read the post you quoted.

(Actually I'm sure you know perfectly well how they are comparable. It's just that there is no way on God's earth that you will ever admit that I have a point...)

In other words, you can't say how they are comparable. Stop being a wanker then and just say so.

 

[Blagsta]

Of course.

But that is not important for the gist of my point: if the police were involved (a) everyone would be the worlds best policing expert, queueing up to shout about how they'd fucked it up (with no evidence whatsoever), (b) be claiming that anyone who actually had any personal knowledge or experience of the situation was just being an "apologist" and (c) the stereotype of incompetent / violent / racist wankers would be liberally applied at the slightest opportunity.

The bottom line is that all members of all the emergency service spend the vast majority of their time doing their best to do the right thing. That some of all the emergency services sometimes do stupid things. That some of them make genuine mistakes which could, especially with hindsight, have been avoided.

They should all be treated in a consistent fashion.

That is not the case here. Some posters apply double standards based on their prejudices. Fact.

So we can treat services in a consistent fashion, despite them being different and serving entirely different functions in society?

 

[detective-boy]

You're not going to answer then?

No. Not again. I already have.

Feel free to take my approach and go "Oh fuck you then. If you can't be bothered I'm going to ignore you".

(But beware!!! Everyone will claim you're having a sulk ... )

 

[butchersapron]

No. You don't. (or, more likely, you do but you can't bring yourself to acknowledge I have a point.


Yes. You are.

Tell you what, if you all want to talk about is cops, even on threads not about cops, then why don't you go find a cop board to post about your all consuming obsession on?

 

[Blagsta]

No. Not again. I already have.

Feel free to take my approach and go "Oh fuck you then. If you can't be bothered I'm going to ignore you".

(But beware!!! Everyone will claim you're having a sulk ... )

So you're not going to answer? You're going to instead cause yet more bad feeling? What's your tagline about? You seem intent on starting fights at the moment.

 

[detective-boy]

So we can treat services in a consistent fashion, despite them being different and serving entirely different functions in society?

I look forward to you reminding Mr.Bishie of that next time he tries to say the police should do their job like what the squaddies would have done ...

 

[Blagsta]

I look forward to you reminding Mr.Bishie of that next time he tries to say the police should do their job like what the squaddies would have done ...

Are you going to answer the question? Or are you going to post non-sequiters all night?

 

[detective-boy]

Tell you what, if you all want to talk about is cops, even on threads not about cops, then why don't you go find a cop board to post about your all consuming obsession on?

I said ages ago that I've made my point.

It's you lot who seem to want to continue discussing it ... maybe it's you who have an obsession with cops ...

 

[Blagsta]

Why are you intent on getting into fights db?

 

[nino_savatte]

I might have guessed it: the reason durutti started this thread was in order to get another cheap shot in about immigrants.

migrants toiling for 14 pound a day
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770


and the left are guilty for ignoring these issues .. come to a meeting on venezuela/russian revolution/iraq/ blah blah

The Daily Mail, durutti? Now I know where you really stand. Of course, you can't resist the temptation to crap on about the mysterious "left" either.

Pitoyable.

 

[Dubversion]

yep - between durutti's initial attempt to make it an immigration issue, and then db's despicable attempts to use it to perpetuate another battle, it's a thread urban should be very proud of.

 

[nino_savatte]

Shabby.

 

[Dubversion]

 

[nino_savatte]

Him a bad boy, y'get me?

 

[zenie]

Oh god here we go again - Db makes an arse of himself...

Deja vu anyone?

Does the OP grow all their own food I wonder, or know exactly what ethical source they're buying from? Unlikely.