Jump to content


Glenn

Member Since 28 Feb 2001
Offline Last Active Private
-----

#1719324 "donald"

Posted by Glenn on 02 January 2017 - 09:23 AM

 

 

Blimey Glenn, you'll have the alt-right in fits at that one.

Lets hope so! If it means just one of them takes the time to re-evaluate their position a little, then my time has been worth it.

Plus, I'm fed up with reading the ignorance and intolerance (not just on here, in general) and I'm no longer bothered about keeping the peace or upsetting contributors.

I'm seeing so many parallels in current world and the conditions that lead to the rise of the Nazi party, but unlike Niemoller, I won't wait until there is nobody left to speak for me, I will speak out, I will stand up, even where it doesn't impact me directly.



 




#1719322 "donald"

Posted by Glenn on 02 January 2017 - 09:12 AM

what do you or glenn or any loving lefties make of this?

 

http://www.mirror.co...ntities-9547664

 

an amazing city now under muslim attack

What do we know so far, we don't know who the terrorist was, or which country he is from (hell, there is some dispute over which continent) but it seems the papers know with some certainty what his religion he was and that he was in immigrant .... odd that, isn't it.

Also, keep in mind that Turkey, whilst Secular, 97.8% of Turks identify as Muslim. So, "Muslim country attacked by lone Muslim terrorist" hardly invokes the same fear as "ISIS-Linked Muslim immigrant attacks Nightclub. Westerners Killed" does it?

The fact you linked that in such a way shows the paper did it's job. 

When the IRA bombed the Arndale, was your first thought "what an amazing city, under Catholic Christian attack" ? No, because you understood that whilst one factor behind the troubles is Ireland was religion. the bigger picture is whole lot more complicated than "my religion is better than yours" and the that the IRA didn't represent the 1.2 billion Roman Catholic worldwide. You understood that vast majority of those Catholics were as repulsed at the IRA bombing campaign as everyone else.

Don't don't me wrong ISIS are evil scumbags who should be eradicated, and Islam, like most other religions, have people at the extremes  trying to use their religion to justify their own evil ends. But that doesn't make the other 99.9% complicit.

 




#1719269 "donald"

Posted by Glenn on 01 January 2017 - 21:56 PM

It's not insecurity though it's fact ... if you don't bow to Muslims every need you are racist .

It's worrying that you generally think that and repeat that. If enough people say it often enough, people start to believe it.

Muslims are no different to people of any faith (on indeed atheists), there are nice one, there are dicks, there are comtemplative ones, there are argumentative ones, there are ones who would do anything for anyone and there are ones who are snakes. The type of person they are is not a function or their religion (technically it can be how well they follow the religion, but the same is true of Christianity). 

Take a step back, many of you identify as "non-practising Christians", now imagine if your only knowledge of Christianity was the paedophiles who run through the heart of the Catholic Church (which the vatican finally seems to want to address). Where is the line between thinking all Catholics turn a blind eye to peadophilia and all Mulims are ISIS sympasizers who want to invoke Sharia law?  

 Seriously, reach out, speak to these people. Don't base your judgement of them on those at the extremes of their religion (that works on both sides).




#1719264 "donald"

Posted by Glenn on 01 January 2017 - 21:42 PM

But halal is being imposed on everyone, by social engineering. Somebody who elects not to eat at KFC or Subway because the meat is halal is labelled a racist, or maybe just a swivel-eyed loom.

Still amazes me in this day and age of being offended about everything that the bleeding heart liberals turn a blind eye to, nay, endorse, the cruel, painful death of animals (not even stunned) as long as they are carried out for [Islamic] religious purposes.

But it's ok because it's a capitalist society and you can choose not to eat there. Rinse, repeat.

Yet, trace amounts of animal fats??? OMG. How insensitive! That needs sorting out quick sharp.

Of course, the really big question is: where the animals that were killed and whose fat is use - in microscopic quantities - halal? :wacko:

Of course me saying this "makes me a racist". :rolleyes:

Meh, call me a racist then. I avoid Halal and Kosher meat on principal. We have perfectly good rules on animal treatment before death and I don't see why any religion should have an exemption for that, just like I don't believe religions should enjoy tax free status or the ability to run faith schools.

... but my belief is nothing to do with any kind of fear of a looming Islamic takeover, I'm a secular humanist that just generally thinks the world could be a fairer place if all religions played fair (and I acknowledge that most people who follow a religion generally do, it's the zealots at the extremist who are the problem).


Your insecurity is sticking out Stuart.

By the way i once saw a swivel-eyed loom at Helmshore Mill - fascinating

I could have sworn Swivel-Eyed Loom supported The Clash at KGH in 1984




#1719260 "donald"

Posted by Glenn on 01 January 2017 - 21:29 PM

Spot on al , it's disgusting admin can class posts as lunacy and racist for saying something that's not ass licking Muslims

I didn't class the post as lunacy, I classed "obscene onions" as lunacy ... and I'll defend that still. I certainly didn't accuse you or the post of being racist, in fact I went to great lengths to explain I was doing neither, so think about what you're accusing me of.

The second part of your statement is a monumental informal fallacy.  The fact I chose to rear my head up into a thread with such vernment "alt-right" (to use an Americanism) posts going unanswered, when I was out gunned, out numbered and you'd have hoped out-smarted, just to put an alternative view, has resulted in a response like that, has given me hope. If that's the best you've got, your cause is lost. Hell, so far, the poster that's actually made my question my own views (see, I choose to do that with things I don't agree with, I find it more productive than being offended by them) is Mike ... and I'd always assumed (wrongly it seems) he was on my "wet liberal" side of the fence :)

As for me being an admin. The second I use my position on the forum to further an argument, I've lost. I won't even moderate threads I'm involved with for fear of showing bias. If you think I have, please call me out for it. For many many years I used an alternative "sock puppet" account to post with, but I thought we were all grown up enough that you'd happier I was using my real, identifiable persona, not some anonymous virtual one.

 




#1719256 "donald"

Posted by Glenn on 01 January 2017 - 21:13 PM

Glenn, I completely understand your point and even agree with it!

But the point was more to do with the fact that the vast majority of outlets in Blackburn now offer halal-only meat. Nothing wrong with that at all in a majority Muslim population.

However, it DOES restrict choices of non-Muslims and certainly FEELS inflicted, given the change in demographic of the town.

Maybe it'd be more comparable to vegetarianism and veganism. Instead of converting the whole menu to appease 5% of the population, they offer a choice.

Now Muslims in Blackburn comprise about 1/3rd of the total population. A significant minority, but a minority nonetheless. Ofc, changing the meat to Halal doesn't affect the product itself but doesn't reflect the tastes of the town either.

Then again, it may be that those against religious slaughter are a minority of meat eaters. Thinking about it, they probably are. Actually maybe you're right, even using my own logic!

See? I'm willing to change opinion even while constructing a post in argument :P

See, we are on common ground. Blackburn DOES have a changing demographic, there is no denying that and people not liking that is understandable. But the world is a changing place, you adapt to survive. Digging your heals in and shouting about it does nobody any good, you just have to keep moving and keep trying to make the world a better place. Certainly removing important freedoms (even if they are from others and you don't see how they'll impact you) is a massive step in the wrong direction and is in and of itself exactly the kind of oppression that people are worried about.




#1719254 "donald"

Posted by Glenn on 01 January 2017 - 21:05 PM

I'm afraid that Halal food is inflicted on us in Blackburn at many fast  food outlets and the minarets ARE obscene and offend me as do the full black outfits. Muslims are quick to tell us what offends them. Now we are telling them what offends us. Abbey's post does not offend me but yours does Glenn.

This is Blackburn, England, supposedly a Christian country, not Islamabad. See if you can buy non halal meat there or alcohol in the shops.

I'm not sure if you didn't read my post, didn't understanding it or are simply trying to counter it by ignoring it (which I'll agree is a popular tactic in modern politics), but it is NOT inflicted on you, because you are free not to eat there, Would you prefer more choices that you did like? Obviously! Hell, I detest places that think it's OK to charge £20 for a fish finger butty if it's served on a plank with a side of kale, but I don't see their popularity as a personal affront to our national identities or to my own personal freedoms. 

What part of a minaret is obscene? The phallic shape? In which case are you equally offended by Ben Ben or Nelson's Column? It seems that "obscenes onions" are actually quite a rare occurrence on minarets in real life (shame, the world needs more obscene onions) but even if it's them, are you equally offended by them on Russian Christian Orthodox churches, where they are far more common. Or is it what may taking place inside that you find obscene? If so, I strongly advise you to take the time to find out, that's what I did and it's very similar to the Christian Churches. It's like watching a US remake of a UK TV show you know, the characters are all wrong, it doesn't quite make sense, but you realise the storyline and overall message is the same.

Full black outfits? As worn Vicars and Nuns you mean? How can clothing offend? The notion that somebody may have been FORCED to wear certain clothing offends me (and we have laws to prevent that, which need far better enforcement), but the clothing itself? How would that even work? 

Muslims are quick to tell us what offends them? Citation needed on that one! How many Muslims have you spoken to recently that have told you what offends them. It's odd, one moment people seem to be screaming about the lack of integration and inability to speak English, but on the other they seem to have a constant open dialogue with the heart of the community. My personal experience is that I've been astounded (and both embarrassed and ashamed they felt it necessary) by the lengths Muslim friends, colleagues and acquaintances have gone to. to  NOT bring up their discomfort at somes situation and their ability to quietly work around them.

Abbey's post didn't offend me either, I thought the point he was trying to make was valid (bar focusing his ire on "obscene onions"), but what in by post could possible offend? It's a counterpoint, and alternative argument, a different view. Are you genuinely *offended* by every opinion that doesn't match your own? If so then it could go a long long way to explaining a lot of things. 

England is technically a CofE country, which is obviously a bastardised form of the Catholic faith, but even prior to that it was hodgepodge of Celtic and Catholic Christianity, which through some shrewd gamesmanship by Constantine, actually owed more to Rome's pagan history than the emerging Christian religion.  Actually, England was very happily pagan before you Christians arrived, so now we've won the Brexit vote, if you'd all sod off back to your papal motherland and take your religion with you, that'd be great! This is Blackburn, Albion, not Rome, we are proud Brigantes! 

And finally, you're seriously challenging me to buy non-halal meat or Alcohol in Blackburn? I don't have time for an FOI request to find out how many alcohol licences BwD has, so just looking around Ewood on google maps, places I can see that see either/both Alcohol or non-Halal meat - Ewood, Blues, Wok Star, Ruchi Bangla, Fernhurst, Aldi, McDonalds, Fox and Hounds, New Dragon, Ewood WMC, Ewood Butty Box, Leavers, Ewood Sandwich Bar, Bargain Booze, Quality Sandwich Bar, Brown Cow, Chopsticks, Master Fu, Sonali, Ewood Convenience Store ... at that's all within half a mile of the ground!
 




#1719044 "donald"

Posted by Glenn on 31 December 2016 - 21:02 PM

In a way, Glenn, it IS inflicted. Those who don't eat religiously slaughtered food can no longer enjoy Subway or KFC in Blackburn, for example.

 

No Mike, it's NOT!

You have the freedom of choice. A VERY important freedom. You can choose to eat there, you can choose not too. That's your choice.

As both Subway and KFC are generally franchises, I strongly suspect that the decision is entirely commercial. You look at your potential market place. If you exclude x% of potential customers by offering non-Halal food and y% by only offering Halal food. It doesn't take a math wiz to realise in certain areas you're going to make more money by going Halal. KFC/Subway aren't saying all KFC/Subway outlets or indeed every fast food outlet should be Halal, they have given the individual outlets FREEDOM to choose. If people were genuinely confident there were enough people in Blackburn unwilling to eat non-Halal chicken to support a second restaurant, somebody would have ponied up the £5m by now and opened one.
 
The problem is everyone takes freedom for granted and confuse it with doing what they personally want. Nobody is being forced to do anything, it's all choice. The second you limit those freedoms to a group of people, you have to consider the consequence if that same logic was used against you. Ban the Niqāb? Sure, but that same law would see scarves over your faces and CP Company Mille Miglia Jackets banned (bit of a problem for CCTV operators those are, the givernment would love them banned). Ban Halal meat? Sure, I'm in favour of that, but expect Foie Gras, Shark Fin, Veal and Lobster to vanish for the same reasons. Ban "obscene onions" .... ok, I have nothing for this one. 

Lets take a different slant at this same situation.

I open a bacon button shop in Blackburn Market (my bacon, like all good British Bacon, is from Denmark), but I choose to ONLY sell it with brown sauce on it. One one side I have people complaining "but the traditional British Bacon Sandwich has to have Ketchup" and on the other I have people going "brown sauce is an abomination". But I want to stick by my guns and serve what the hell I like. Should I? Or should I bow to the pressure of others insisting what the "right" way to sell a bacon butty is? Personally, I'm glad I have the freedom to sell them how I want and they have the freedom to either do one, or open a competing bacon butty shop that uses ketchup if they want.

[ ... and before anyone attempts to divert this, I'm **NOT** arguing in favour of Halal or Kosher meat, frankly I think it's a barbaric practice that has no place in modern society. I am simply arguing that Halal food is still a choice even if you local preferred eatery now happens to only serve it.  ]




#1719023 New Article -> Away Fans Agenda Disclosed!

Posted by Glenn on 31 December 2016 - 19:37 PM

After Rovers defeat away to Barnsley, in a move that saw many fans asking if he'd been drinking the same Kool-aid as convicted drink driver and not-a-dog owner Steve Kean, Coyle claimed "[a] group of fans have got their own agendas".
 
However, we can now reveal that he was correct as the Agenda for todays game at Huddersfield has been circulated. (all credit to @ianherbert on twitter)
 
Posted Image


Click here to view the article


#1699973 Hmrc

Posted by Glenn on 20 September 2016 - 20:33 PM

As an quick test, it took me less than 30 seconds to find his email address without using anything more than normal level access to the forum. He'd left it exactly where I suspected he had.

Ads .... in return, if you want me to help track where the email actually came from, feel free to email me via admin@brfcs.com and I'll talk you through getting me info needed start the search.




#1699968 Hmrc

Posted by Glenn on 20 September 2016 - 20:21 PM

This anon threat don't make sense.

Not possible to get his email addy based on his post or forum id...

Unless he posted his personal info and they went through his 1400 posts and found it. Unlikely.

I also bet half the posters aren't even still using the email addy they registered with.

If no legal threat certainly no legal request for info to the site.
If there had been, I expect site would seek legal advice before submitting any personal info.

So its someone who knows him (a fan) or someone with access to the site database or BS.

Give him a new alias and lets release further info differently.

They could have filed a request for us to help them get in contact with him/her under Section 5 of the 2014 Defamation Act, which we'd have been very happy to oblige with (almost all legal threats based on user generated content are now directed this way), the government have written some clear, concise and ultimately fair guidance on the whole procedure, but to the best of my knowledge (i.e. unless Ste dealt with it and didn't mention it, which is rather unlikely) then no such request has been made.

My guess is they did some good old OSINT and found it some other way


  • Dan likes this


#1685875 9.30Pm Tonight - New Social Media Hashtag

Posted by Glenn on 17 August 2016 - 17:11 PM

One thing which is always strange, is that why anybody would sign an NDA if they know something is dodgy. Leave the club, tell venkys to screw their job and spill what you know. I know its never easy to give up your job, but there were far too many players and staff who have signed an NDA allegedly, knowing full well what is happening.


You normally sign an NDA as part of your contract of employment (i.e. when you start work at a company), not once it becomes obvious you've seen something you shouldn't have.


#1685677 9.30Pm Tonight - New Social Media Hashtag

Posted by Glenn on 17 August 2016 - 11:50 AM

I've just had a quick tidy up. Somebody had left some powder lying around and I sensed big heavy storm clouds on the horizon.


#1685182 9.30Pm Tonight - New Social Media Hashtag

Posted by Glenn on 16 August 2016 - 13:06 PM

Just to clarify, are we saying the documents sent by Glen are out in the public domain or there are more allegedly incriminating documents sat in a Dropbox somewhere that could be easily accessed via Twitter?


Sorry, I should have been clearer. People were asking if Glen's "zip file" + extras + the original stuff, which you guys are all emailing to each other, could be dumped online somewhere. I was pointing out that they have and it only took me a few mins to find tweets linking to them.

There may well be new info coming, but that wasn't what I was alluding to.

Obvious Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with uploading them, I just found tweets pointing to them and we won't allow them to be hosted by this site, for obvious reasons.


#1685173 9.30Pm Tonight - New Social Media Hashtag

Posted by Glenn on 16 August 2016 - 12:36 PM

Is there anyway for whoever has the more incendiary stuff to put it online via a Dropbox or on a wiki leaks style page so it is ALL out there without that person risking prosecution?

Could it not all be uploaded via an Internet cafe or disseminated via an email account bounced off of servers all over the globe?

They are on public file sharing sites. I found links to them on twitter.
 

Where's anonymous when you need them?

 
Blame Assange, when Wikileaks first started, it was a community thing where anyone could upload any leak at all. Still, all the info that is being discussed in this thread is available for download from somewhere or other.
 

A time line of events would be useful, copy and paste the text in case they dissapear :)
17th Dec 2010 Kean admits he wants the managers Job http://www.independe...ob-2162997.html
 
22nd Dec 2010 - ""Desai" gives Kean job till end of season http://www.telegraph...gue-season.html
 
4th Jan 2011  After winning one of his 4 games in charge "Desai"" reveals she has offered Kean a 2 or 3 year deal http://www.skysports...6634005,00.html

I've spent the last couple of evening working on something that includes a detailed timeline (including what is validated and corroborated and what is rumor and supposition). Currently it's just a rapidly going word doc in a dropbox folder, but you're more than welcome to help. It's already a couple of pages long and I've barely scratched the surface.





Important Legal Information


All content is copyright of its respective posters and may not be representative of the views of BRFCS Ltd, its staff, volunteers, members, sponsors or advertisers. Content on the public forums of this site is not pre-moderated. If you feel that any content is defamatory or constitutes harassment, or that it contravenes the site posting guidelines, or that it may result in the site or its owners, volunteers, users or members facing legal action, you should alert BRFCS immediately either by using the REPORT function available on every post or by sending an email to admin@brfcs.com with details of the content in question.


Note that this site uses cookies. As the site does not function without cookies, any use of the site implies consent for us to use them. Under new European law, BRFCS is required to disclose how these cookies are used. Please see our privacy policy for more information.


BRFCS Ltd. Registered in England and Wales under company registration number 07315781.