[Just Iron]

Not 100% with your post, Sidey ..but generally appreciated.

[Just Iron]

OK, Gurney. I suspected it was more about me and my professed faith when I read your first response. I shrugged at that point but Sidey’s reasonable perspective has drawn our your true motivation so I’ll give some detail ..though I’m a little less than optimistic that you’ll modify your position regarding my ‘compassion’ or otherwise.
My ‘sudden’ interest specifically in Armenia has lasted many years. I work with and support a Charity that has given aid to Armenia for years. I was there ten months ago giving aid specifically to the increasing number of injured and displaced folks from Nagorno Kharabakh. Clearly when this came to a head a couple of weeks ago I would be distressed.
I also give financially to another more generalised charity that gives aid to other areas of need such as South Sudan or Yemen. I also host a monthly prayer group in my home and have given researched information and led prayer for the countries you mention.But there’s no doubt that I feel called to concentrate my meager time and resources to the Armenia situation.
As far as ‘favouring’ Christian groups I would add that my wife volunteers at a refugee charity teaching English to refugees and asylum seekers.. 95% of whom come from places like Syria and Afganistan. Several have come to our home as friends. When the former Jugoslavia broke apart 20 plus years ago I was part of a group from several churches who brought 23 families to Leeds. They were a mixture of Serb, Croatia and Bosnian Muslims ..often mixed marriages with nowhere to go. The majority were Bosnian Muslim. I took time out of my business for 6 weeks to run the Centre and then agreed to stay ..eventually with pay.. until they were resettled 18 months later.
I know that you are concerned about ‘the Christian right’. Two suggestions from. One would be to not caricature a diverse spectrum of people who carry a particular label so that they can be shoehorned to fit your own agenda. Secondly ..use your own energy and resources and compassion to help the poor folks that you highlighted.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Siderite

[Just Iron]

Is this funny? I must have lost my sense of humour over the last few years.

1 user thanked author for this post.

backofthenet18

[Just Iron]

I’m not sure the last part of your post is accurate Apollo. I agree that there may be some who can’t be pleased … but I reckon that by far the vast majority would accept a workable solution that gives a genuine hope and a future.

[Just Iron]

Thanks ..again..for the above posts IA, Sidey, 64 and Deerey. I’ve not been on much this last week because of hols and poor connection/ limited data. The bits I’ve kept up with re voices calling for unity etc have been so encouraging. IA nails it re Awaywego’s approach. I hope the fog clears. We will need anyone and everyone together if a door of possibility opens.

[Just Iron]

What has happened?

[Just Iron]

Yep. Nailed it.

[Just Iron]

Rene Artois wrote:

Just Iron wrote:

I get the feeling that somehow ..and there has been a glimpse of it that was retracted .. pleas for an avoidance of tit for tat and any appearance of stooping to ‘juveniles’ level will be interpreted as being on ‘ t’other side.’
Whilst the title of this thread remains and posts like Rene’s .. ‘repugnant taste’ .. remain then I’m not too likely to see the Bru as being elevated as far up the moral high ground as we should be.

It was a tongue in cheek (face), jocular throw away comment.
Apologies if I’ve offended the hyper sensitive.

I made my point. One man’s ‘hyper sensitivity’ may be another’s ‘common decency.’

[Just Iron]

I get the feeling that somehow ..and there has been a glimpse of it that was retracted .. pleas for an avoidance of tit for tat and any appearance of stooping to ‘juveniles’ level will be interpreted as being on ‘ t’other side.’
Whilst the title of this thread remains and posts like Rene’s .. ‘repugnant taste’ .. remain then I’m not too likely to see the Bru as being elevated as far up the moral high ground as we should be.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Northumbiron, MK Iron, Apollo11

[Just Iron]

Rene Artois wrote:

<strong class=”d4pbbc-bold”>DH arse lickers site

Are they awaking to the repugnant taste yet?

My hope ..probably way too over optimistic.. is that out of this mess the fan base will still be able to hold together and we will still have several thousand punters united to re build and move on. Thread titles like this one don’t help! Neither do smug ‘ I told you sos’ on the same theme,Rene.

[Just Iron]

ps obviously moved it ‘below’ now. The ‘lickers’ thread!!

[Just Iron]

A great post 64. I want to point out that the title of the post above this one doesn’t match any standard of civility. I pointed it out at the time. I don’t do Facebook or Twitter and so have avoided what seem to be horrendous postings by immature kids ..or older ..but we on here could lead by example.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Iron-awe, doris, Northumbiron, North Lincolnshire Irons, Siderite

[Just Iron]

Ah. Just saw the withdrawal. Appreciated. And also Sidey for pointing out that I’ve pretty largely kept out of this mess. I do recall being sick of IBs relentless postings ..but there were plenty of others who suggested he take a break.

[Just Iron]

CMC wrote:

Has anyone seen the following:
Pat O’Cake
Xxx
Just Iron
Recently?

Hi CMC. I’ve posted on non footie this morning. What am I supposed to have done to be on your list?

[Just Iron]

Gurnelista wrote:

The Met is in a terrible state and has been for years, with murder of innocent/unarmed suspects, rape and many other appalling events, many involving women and blacks. It badly needs root and branch reform, but of course there will be resistance. I think you need to recognise this JI and not be so quick to defend the status quo.

I’m sure you do… even though I wasn’t.

[Just Iron]

Yep. Let’s leave the streets to police themselves. That makes sense. Let’s also demonise every policeman trained for weapons as ‘gun happy.’ No need for any caution or reasoned debate. What could possibly go wrong?
Nauseating level of analysis.

1 user thanked author for this post.

TheJuryeffsOut

[Just Iron]

A sensible ‘take’ I think.
The Spectator Brendan O’Neill You Tube is wrong to rush to judgment on Russel Brand

[Just Iron]

Deereyme66 wrote:

Really can’t be bothered to go in to great detail to justify why I class them as’types’ JI. Suffice to say they all share similar conspiracy theorist supporting, pseudo free speech warrior, narcissistic, right wing traits in what the say and write. I’m done with this subject btw. Hope the victims go to the police and he gets what he deserves and they get some justice

I’ve said plenty above which relates to the wider context of those dissenting voices who challenge and interrogate the Progressive Establishment . Directly to the Brand issue I am absolutely appalled as well as chilled by that concluding sentence Deerey. I won’t labour previous points about the security for us all in long established and slowly evolved institutions adhering to principles of due process and presumption of innocence. The fact that no one else on the forum has expressed any degree of distate for the implications of that statement doesn’t help me to steer away from the dissenting voices whish are emerging as long established institutional freedoms are eroded.

[Just Iron]

I seem to be a bit of a lone voice on this one though there have been some points of agreement and also some evidences of a bit less polarisation for which I’m grateful. A couple of further comments.
I don’t see the same evidence in Peterson of mental disturbance as you do, Sidey. Maybe I’m just not paying attention ..but I do listen to a fair amount of his stuff. Its also possible that you are coloured by your dislike of some of the positions he takes. I would urge caution on any referring back to those well documented mental/addiction battles. Some of us have also been there and just might have emerged more sane than Joe average.
Another concern is this use of ‘Conspiracist’which I see as a bit of a catch all disqualifier for anyone challenging the ‘progressive’ agenda. The word ‘populist’is used in the same way. If anyone challenges the view, for example, that society is characterised by the fact that men are somehow inherently toxic and women generally victimised by this pathology then the labelling kicks in. The same with any challenge to the notion that not only must LGBTQ plus representation be tolerated but also promoted or even celebrated as evidence of decency. Likewise with anyone suggesting that it’s not clear to what extent the climate is changing in terms of speed, extent and potential catastrophe nor whether alleviation measures may not actually cause more suffering and even death than those proposed measures. These are just a few examples of how a narrative is being promoted ..from what is now a progressive establishment .. which seems to brook little challenge and seems to carry the approval and cooperation of the press, other media and other institutions in a whole swathe of countries. Whilst I agree that some go too far in ‘seeing’this as an issue I believe that the rise of alternative outlets for news and discussion is necessary and healthy. Many of the voices which are dismissed as conspiracists do, I believe, provide an essential balance to progressive establishment power.
One more point ..and a major one more directly related to the Brand case ..but I’ll post this first because I don’t want to lose it!

[Just Iron]

Of course those 4 could be categorised in that way. What’s the relevance of this to previous posts?

[Just Iron]

No need for that last little dig, Heath. I thought the rest of your post was perfectly sound.

On the ‘types’ who have may somehow ‘defended’ Brand I would just point out that they differ massively in their views and backgrounds. To lump Peterson with Galloway or Musk with Tate I find revealing and disturbing. I guess what apparently unites them is the perception that they are all that Sidey detests… untrustworthy, conspiracy theorists, blindly partisan etc I’ve no axe to grind for any of them .well, maybe Peterson .. and have always disliked Galloway .. but I do still maintain that referencing these individuals as a gang of ‘types’ shows that the political aspect of the Brand case can’t be discounted.

[Just Iron]

IB .. when even the folks who have consistently been favourable to your disclosures are finding you weird to the point of being obsessive..then maybe it’s time for a rest. You have made your contribution. Why can’t you consider your work to be done. Surely not because DH is still in situ and the club still playing games?

[Just Iron]

To add to Randoms points … Brackley unbeaten at home, we came within a few mins of winning, at one nil up and a few mins left we hit the bar, only 9 fit men for the last few mins,they equalised with a ‘worldie’, we conceded the penalty after over committing to try to equalise in the last seconds. A low point …yes, fair enough. But not the picture painted above re the performance…Add to that squad players missing.. Scales, Beeston, Clunan etc. If we survive …we will be somewhere near the top.

[Just Iron]

The ‘types’ of people? You mean people who don’t share the same political perspective as yourself? That’s not a’type’ … unless folks who don’t accept a particular worldview can be characterised as somehow flawed in character, morally deficient or inherently evil. It’s the same shallow ..dare I say lazy .. low resolution thinking that categorises any Republican supporter as dimwitted, any Tory or Tory voter as uncaring and self centred or, for further example, any Christian as uneducated and naive. I found the exchange above to be pretty ‘in depth’ and reasonable even though there was much disagreement. I hope that people raising perfectly valid concerns about the timing, the fact that it came through the Press rather than Police, the fact that Brand was feted until relatively recently when his affiliations moved away from a more leftish, progressive agenda and the concerns about the presumption of innocence and the necessity for due process won’t mean that they are the wrong ‘type.’

[Just Iron]

Which ones ‘defending’ Brand? Any names?

[Just Iron]

Are you sure that’s a real photo Deerey? Looks a bit suspect to me… but then I’m becoming more sceptical with every passing week.

[Just Iron]

Yes ..stop it. :)

[Just Iron]

Yep. That cautionary last para is pretty healthy ..though you might just be the one who is totally correct!! (Although it may possibly be me).

1 user thanked author for this post.

Siderite

[Just Iron]

As I said ..I think he made some good points and I genuinely wanted to have my thinking challenged. For me …and going beyond the ‘Brand issue’ ..he touched on the increasingly polarised societal issue whereby for one side its all about ‘deep state’, ‘fake news’ and globalist agendas and on the other people conned into a post truth mindset who display ‘naive cynicism’ and look for information outside the mainstream. He makes clear where he stands, as is his right, bur I can’t help thinking that his own phraseology and assumptions are pretty much as ‘naive’ as those he caricatures on t’other side. I AM definitely disillusioned by much of the approach of what I call ‘the legacy media’ and concerned about the erosion of long held assumptions encapsulated in, for example, our evolved institutions. I definitely am concerned about some of the pathologies of the so called and increasing ‘progressive agenda.’ ..but I resent being called ‘naive’,’cynical’ or some kind of ‘conspiracy theorist’ for differing from his perspective. I guess that on the forum folks like yourself have at times been genuinely puzzled and maybe provoked by my wacky perspectives.But if ‘naive’ means unthinking, simplistic and lacking in analytical thought ..then is that a label you would think it fair to stick on me no matter how mistaken you might think me to be? If ‘cynical’ means negative and lacking vision and hope then I would be truly sad if that’s the impression given by any of my contributions. And if being ‘post truth’ means being unconcerned with Truth itself and objective reality ..then, no matter how much I might differ from Sam Leith, I know where love of Truth stands on my hierarchy of values.

ps if you wonder where all that came from..I was going out to do some work but the heavens opened and I had an unexpected hour.

[Just Iron]

ps I just read Sam Leith on this in ‘The Spectator.’ I think you would appreciate it. Me probably a bit less so. I think he raises some great points …but all in one direction.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66, Siderite

[Author]

Posts