• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

Recommended Posts

On now ITV.

Going undercover with some of Britain's far right groups, investigating their international connections and online presence.

 

From what I've seen so far where can I sign up to join some of these groups. Not what I think the programme makers are trying to encourage.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

From what I've seen so far where can I sign up to join some of these groups. Not what I think the programme makers are trying to encourage

Haha, I was thinking the same! xD

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Frank Hovis said:

They way the media sweepingly defines it I would say that anyone I know who isn't either a SJW or a bit thick and believing everything the media tells them would fall under this huge blanket definition of far right.

I've just watched this clip about Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman amongst other things he's being accused of fighting against isis.  I suppose that does go against the So-Called BBC agenda!!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEnLpsFcnPc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Football Lads Alliance hmmm 

Not for me, i can't stand football, imagine being in a pub to discuss the issues and some mongs keep going on about the lastest foreign signing at west ham etc? 

How can you be "Far Right" but be loving the whole Football "foreign signings" thing? name dropping etc  

Edited by WorkingPoor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, WorkingPoor said:

Football Lads Alliance hmmm 

Not for me, i can't stand football, imagine being in a pub to discuss the issues and some mongs keep going on about the lastest foreign signing at west ham etc? 

How can you be "Far Right" but be loving the whole Football "foreign signings" thing? name dropping etc  

Well yes, it is by football people and the point is that they are not far right despite the media slurs.

It's not Combat 88 racism, it is what it says it is: football fans against terrorism.

Whilst they are in a minority and I don't really like picking them out to prove a point there were black fans on this last march which underlines that the agenda is emphatically not racist.

football-lads-alliance-london.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The danger with dumbing down the term "extreme right" and making it inclusive of normal people, is that it normalises the extreme right. 

 

 

Edited by snagger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else think think Tommy Robinson is thick as pigshit?  You can see the steam coming off his head as he tries to articulate.

That isn't to say I don't agree with what he says, I probably do agree, but I can't stick around long enough for him to get a sentence out. There are far more intelligent working-class people involved in right of centre stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, spunko2010 said:

Does anyone else think think Tommy Robinson is thick as pigshit?  You can see the steam coming off his head as he tries to articulate.

That isn't to say I don't agree with what he says, I probably do agree, but I can't stick around long enough for him to get a sentence out. There are far more intelligent working-class people involved in right of centre stuff.

It takes a lot to go through what he has/does/will, I suspect the more articulate also calculated what it was going to mean putting themselves out there like TR and decided that it wasn't worth it or they didn't have what it took.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, spunko2010 said:

Does anyone else think think Tommy Robinson is thick as pigshit?  You can see the steam coming off his head as he tries to articulate.

That isn't to say I don't agree with what he says, I probably do agree, but I can't stick around long enough for him to get a sentence out. There are far more intelligent working-class people involved in right of centre stuff.

No I don't think he's a thick as pigshit. I know a lot of people like him / like his background (not necessarily like his views) and I'd say that they are as intelligent as I am and I have a PhD. I know plenty of people with PhDs who I'd class as thick as pigshit mind. I don't think you can get the exposure he has without being good at somethings, and that requires ability/intelligence. I am sure with training he could be more 'articulate', but he doens't need to be as he is fit for his purpose.

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, spunko2010 said:

Does anyone else think think Tommy Robinson is thick as pigshit?  You can see the steam coming off his head as he tries to articulate.

That isn't to say I don't agree with what he says, I probably do agree, but I can't stick around long enough for him to get a sentence out. There are far more intelligent working-class people involved in right of centre stuff.

Often when I am challenged about my opinion or facts during a discussion I have difficulty in formulating a reply and making an articulate response. I don't think I'm thick its the way I react when I feel I'm under attack or under stress. 

The clips I've seen of TR seem to show him commenting as he is feeling and not delivering a rehearsed presentation. The raw and unrehearsed delivery is perhaps intentional. It may appeal to some who would not be as impressed with a cool and calmly presentation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

No I don't think he's a thick as pigshit. I know a lot of people like him / like his background (not necessarily like his views) and I'd say that they are as intelligent as I am and I have a PhD. I know plenty of people with PhDs who I'd class as thick as pigshit mind. I don't think you can get the exposure he has without being good at somethings, and that requires ability/intelligence. I am sure with training he could be more 'articulate', but he doens't need to be as he is fit for his purpose.

I know loads of people with his views and working class, I include myself in that. But the way he struggles and stammers I find does more damage to the cause than good. Up against anyone else of substance (i.e. not some mullah from Luton) he would be obliterated, if he were allowed that far anyway.

Just now, sleepwello'nights said:

Often when I am challenged about my opinion or facts during a discussion I have difficulty in formulating a reply and making an articulate response.

Yes, I agree with that and am the same... But that's why I'm not on TV and prefer to think and type!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think alot of this is borne out of "football" im pretty sure that's where TR & the EDL came from? 

I just can't feel any affinity not being a football fan and disliking all the "banter" that comes with it 

I'm not going to be attending a march wearing a football shirt and chanting team related slogans like "RED ARMY" etc 

Edited by WorkingPoor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, spunko2010 said:

I know loads of people with his views and working class, I include myself in that. But the way he struggles and stammers I find does more damage to the cause than good. Up against anyone else of substance (i.e. not some mullah from Luton) he would be obliterated, if he were allowed that far anyway.

He hasn't had that 'higher' exposure or training of his brain. He articulates to his audience, just like Trump tweets to his. He may rise to the challenge or he may not. I suspect he could.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, spunko2010 said:

I know loads of people with his views and working class, I include myself in that. But the way he struggles and stammers I find does more damage to the cause than good. Up against anyone else of substance (i.e. not some mullah from Luton) he would be obliterated, if he were allowed that far anyway.

Mind you he held up well when Piers Morgan tried his hatchet interview.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Frank Hovis said:

What we see now in the media's definition of far right is similar to the sexual harassment coverage where they are running together a hand on a knee or an inappropriate comment with sexual assault and rape.

There is a far right lunatic fringe but much of what is now termed far right is basically anyone standing against the liberal / globalist agenda of mass immigration and the destruction of the nation state both from the top down (no borders movement) and at its root by deliberately fragmenting small towns by multiculturalism.

The Football Lads' Alliance is a bunch of ordinary people standing against what sunni islam facilitated by the government is doing to the working class communities in which they live and work; these same people would have been voting Labour in the fifties because then Labour wanted to protect them and their communities.

They way the media sweepingly defines it I would say that anyone I know who isn't either a SJW or a bit thick and believing everything the media tells them would fall under this huge blanket definition of far right.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Northern Welsh Midlander said:

It takes a lot to go through what he has/does/will, I suspect the more articulate also calculated what it was going to mean putting themselves out there like TR and decided that it wasn't worth it or they didn't have what it took.

And that's where Douglas Murray comes in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spunko2010 said:

Does anyone else think think Tommy Robinson is thick as pigshit?  You can see the steam coming off his head as he tries to articulate.

That isn't to say I don't agree with what he says, I probably do agree, but I can't stick around long enough for him to get a sentence out. There are far more intelligent working-class people involved in right of centre stuff.

In that recent interview he totally demolished Piers Morgan.  He's not grade A articulate, few are, but he's quick and to the point and gets his points across more than adequately.

Edited by twocents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

Often when I am challenged about my opinion or facts during a discussion I have difficulty in formulating a reply and making an articulate response. I don't think I'm thick its the way I react when I feel I'm under attack or under stress. 

The clips I've seen of TR seem to show him commenting as he is feeling and not delivering a rehearsed presentation. The raw and unrehearsed delivery is perhaps intentional. It may appeal to some who would not be as impressed with a cool and calmly presentation. 

Compare and contrast with the trained politician, schooled in the soundbite , repetition and never going off message. Who is more believable? TR is getting more exposure and should get better at his articulation and utterings (experience, practice, brain connections...). Trump isn't particularly articulate yet he has managed to connect - his repetition more believable because it has an element of truth behind it (Scott Adams [Dilbert] is good at examining his 'persuasion' techniques).

Maybe after years of robotic rhetoric (since Blair really), people find it quite refreshing to hear people speak with genuine passion and insight.

As for the programme not seen it, I imagine another Media/Establishment stitch-up, whilst they try to keep the lid on the mess they've created. Anyone who isn't with them and their feminised, multi-culti, hypocritical liberalism is effectively a right-wing extremist. Maybe the working class 'scum' will save us... (like they did in the trenches).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Alonso Quijano said:

Compare and contrast with the trained politician, schooled in the soundbite , repetition and never going off message. Who is more believable? TR is getting more exposure and should get better at his articulation and utterings (experience, practice, brain connections...). Trump isn't particularly articulate yet he has managed to connect - his repetition more believable because it has an element of truth behind it (Scott Adams [Dilbert] is good at examining his 'persuasion' techniques).

Maybe after years of robotic rhetoric (since Blair really), people find it quite refreshing to hear people speak with genuine passion and insight.

As for the programme not seen it, I imagine another Media/Establishment stitch-up, whilst they try to keep the lid on the mess they've created. Anyone who isn't with them and their feminised, multi-culti, hypocritical liberalism is effectively a right-wing extremist. Maybe the working class 'scum' will save us... (like they did in the trenches).

They might never go off message behind the scenes and in private but in front of the cameras they're constantly ducking, diving and weaving constantly off the subject and avoiding the question and the issue etc.  Never taken to task by an interviewer about any of their daft answers and avoidance techniques.

That's another area where TR beats them hands down - he does stay on his message and unwaveringly despite all the petty little ploys to distract him such as the well known insults and continual interruptions etc - something that the typical trained establishment politician doesn't ever have to endure.

Edited by twocents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw a bit of this tonight with the ardently left-wing in-laws. Almost dropped a bollock walking into the lounge when I said "Isn't that Paul Joseph Watson?"

Fuck me, I hadn't realised what the context was at that point...

Totally agree with what @Frank Hovis was saying above about conflating anything not on message with the far-right. I'm ashamed to say I wasn't brave enough to argue against this whilst the program was on. Too tired and it's hard to identify as one of the people the program was vilifying.

An amusing aside though, father-in-law thought it was acceptable to "throw bricks at" those exercising their legal right to demonstrate...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.