• 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!

Sign in to follow this  
201p

Soldiers to go to fight without guns - they're offensive

Recommended Posts

Sheer lack of backbone by the council; if "one or two" didn't like it then "one or two" should have been named, shamed, and overruled.

 

Parish councillor Harry Oram added: "One or two people didn't like the image of a rifle on the soldier's back. Perhaps on this occasion the council didn't represent the views of the community."

Share this post


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

Sheer lack of backbone by the council; if "one or two" didn't like it then "one or two" should have been named, shamed, and overruled.

 

Parish councillor Harry Oram added: "One or two people didn't like the image of a rifle on the soldier's back. Perhaps on this occasion the council didn't represent the views of the community."

One or two people overruling the majority. I’ll leave it to you to decide what this says about the current state of democracy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people have given up the idea of "making allowances" these days. Here's an example:

the Royal Yacht Britannia found an ingenious way to get around a similar issue.

When it navigated an inland waterway, large crowds would appear on the banks and wave. The crew had jobs to do, and couldn’t afford to wave back for too long. So, to avoid giving offence, the officers organised waving parties to do the job.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6217109/Princess-Anne-reveals-Queens-love-waving-machine.html

If people made allowances that the crew have a job to do, then they needn't worry about giving offence. Look the crew have got to keep their eyes on the sea. But anyway, the other option is do the Trump way and not give a flying hoot.

14456159.jpg?quality=70%26strip=all%26w=512%26h=288%26crop=1&f=1

^Trump didn't wave at the cameras the first time, because he didn't give a flying **** about giving offence. 

But for people who make allowances, we'd think he was probably had a lot on his mind doing his job.

MAKE ALLOWANCES! Then we'd not worry about offence!

Share this post


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

One or two people overruling the majority. I’ll leave it to you to decide what this says about the current state of democracy. 

RL example from one of my past boards.  We used to have a very successful way of getting our individual customers accounts up to date, meaning collecting smallish outstanding balances, by having "Blitz" events in particular areas.

They were pre advertised on the website and generally well received with the use of the term "Blitz" helping; it wasn't like sending the baliffs round.

Anyway one of these types said "Do we actually use the term Blitz in our literature? Because that could be very offensive to any of our older customers who remember the war."

Fortunately one of the not politically correct board members, ex copper, was unable to suppress his laughter at this and nothing changed.

You can see though how in a weak board, such as a parish council could be, that such vocal nonsense would get through for a quiet life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole point is that mix of emotions -- gratitude and remembrance, yes, but also horror and waste and pointlessness.  Complaining about 'a gun' suggests that they're treating like a fairground ride (albeit a slow one in drizzle).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, dgul said:

The whole point is that mix of emotions -- gratitude and remembrance, yes, but also horror and waste and pointlessness.  Complaining about 'a gun' suggests that they're treating like a fairground ride (albeit a slow one in drizzle).

Good point and maybe if we are going to be offended by guns, we should also be offended by those who started both wars.  

Looking at you the establishment, royals and politicians both. 

Off with their heads!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 201p said:

I think people have given up the idea of "making allowances" these days. Here's an example:

the Royal Yacht Britannia found an ingenious way to get around a similar issue.

When it navigated an inland waterway, large crowds would appear on the banks and wave. The crew had jobs to do, and couldn’t afford to wave back for too long. So, to avoid giving offence, the officers organised waving parties to do the job.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6217109/Princess-Anne-reveals-Queens-love-waving-machine.html

If people made allowances that the crew have a job to do, then they needn't worry about giving offence. Look the crew have got to keep their eyes on the sea. But anyway, the other option is do the Trump way and not give a flying hoot.

14456159.jpg?quality=70%26strip=all%26w=512%26h=288%26crop=1&f=1

^Trump didn't wave at the cameras the first time, because he didn't give a flying **** about giving offence. 

But for people who make allowances, we'd think he was probably had a lot on his mind doing his job.

MAKE ALLOWANCES! Then we'd not worry about offence!

Couldn't the Royal Family do all the waving.

I thought that's what they do.

In fact, I thought that's all that they do.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, One percent said:

Good point and maybe if we are going to be offended by guns, we should also be offended by those who started both wars.  

Looking at you the establishment, royals and politicians both. 

Off with their heads!

I suppose they think we should be offended by anyone who says or does anything at all challenging.  Perhaps we should close the Holocaust museum (which has lots of very nasty pictures) and paint Auschwitz in more cheery colours (as the place is dreary and that gets you down a bit). 

Share this post


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

RL example from one of my past boards.  We used to have a very successful way of getting our individual customers accounts up to date, meaning collecting smallish outstanding balances, by having "Blitz" events in particular areas.

They were pre advertised on the website and generally well received with the use of the term "Blitz" helping; it wasn't like sending the baliffs round.

Anyway one of these types said "Do we actually use the term Blitz in our literature? Because that could be very offensive to any of our older customers who remember the war."

Fortunately one of the not politically correct board members, ex copper, was unable to suppress his laughter at this and nothing changed.

You can see though how in a weak board, such as a parish council could be, that such vocal nonsense would get through for a quiet life.

Untitled.png.920a0ef909ec1a5f7f4d66aceea8b795.png

^He always uses that word on TV. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's one of these figures in the village near me - right near a busy junction, it's been there for weeks and still catches me out every time thinking it's someone waiting to cross. xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, spunko said:

There's one of these figures in the village near me - right near a busy junction, it's been there for weeks and still catches me out every time thinking it's someone waiting to cross. xD

Phone the cops : "I can't be sure but I think I saw a man with a gun". Five squads of swat team will bomb everything flat, problem solved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Austin Allegro said:

I look forward to these ars*eholes complaining in 30 years' time that they don't like the local Islamic militia carrying guns around. 

 

I don't know. I think many parish councils will be pro Islamic militia in 30 years time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/17185958.silent-soldier-memorial-for-war-dead-is-vandalised-but-one-man-took-it-upon-himself-to-fix-it/

Silent Soldier memorial for war dead is vandalised - but one man took it upon himself to fix it

Martin ******* found out the figure had been vandalised via a Facebook group at 11.30am on Friday.

Edited by 201p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/09/2018 at 09:16, Frank Hovis said:

RL example from one of my past boards.  We used to have a very successful way of getting our individual customers accounts up to date, meaning collecting smallish outstanding balances, by having "Blitz" events in particular areas.

They were pre advertised on the website and generally well received with the use of the term "Blitz" helping; it wasn't like sending the baliffs round.

Anyway one of these types said "Do we actually use the term Blitz in our literature? Because that could be very offensive to any of our older customers who remember the war."

Fortunately one of the not politically correct board members, ex copper, was unable to suppress his laughter at this and nothing changed.

You can see though how in a weak board, such as a parish council could be, that such vocal nonsense would get through for a quiet life.

Yes it's like trying to pretend an event didn't happen.  British adults used to use it quite often for decades after the war.  Now when it is well in the past it suddenly becomes a no no - in general terms it wouldn't be a policy passed down because it could be offensive to older German customers would it as Germany rules the roost these days. 

Edited by twocents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.